Showing posts with label anthropomorphism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label anthropomorphism. Show all posts

Thursday, March 23, 2017

'Beauty and the Beast's Enchanted Objects Become a Cautionary Tale For Today's 'Smart' World

Enchanted objects are one of those fairy tale elements many people love. (We posted on the appeal some time ago HERE.) When Disney's 1991 Beauty and the Beast chose to have visible enchanted servants, instead of the traditional invisible ones, people were thoroughly, well, enchanted. Everywhere people wished their own household objects would come to life and help them with their own life conundrums. It really wasn't until the live action remake's "first looks" pics appeared on the internet, that people processed just how frightening a real enchanted object could be.

For the entire nostalgia crowd, most of whom adored the animated talking objects (and preferred their object form to human form, if they admitted it) seeing the direction the live update was heading in via pics released on the internet, was a wake-up call: one, that some things should not, perhaps, be transformed from animation to 'real', and two, that having (truly) sentient furniture and accessories (and homes) in real life could actually be a pretty creepy notion. It turned out to be one of the biggest challenges of the creative team: to produce believably real enchanted objects that still appealed to audiences, instead of horrifying them.

Even with a lot of effort and (eventually) enthusiastic responses from audiences to the trailers showing the results, one of the most consistent negative comments we've heard from enthusiasts and critics alike (including the exiting audience when we saw the film) is how sinister they felt the enchanted objects were throughout the movie. There was additional dialogue from the enchanted servants in the film, which added to this impression, but in the new movie, it was pretty clear the household were very personally motivated (ie. had their own agenda) to keep Belle in the castle, and prevented her from leaving multiple times, when a truly friendly object would have done the opposite. In fact, toward the end, there was quite a divide between the feelings the Beast had for Belle and the servants. It was only out of respect (and possibly love) for their Master, that the objects accepted the Beast releasing Belle to go see her father. Household objects preventing you from leaving  - something Belle managed to narrowly outwit at one point, thanks to taking advantage of an oversized 'doggie door' - is pretty chilling.

There is a whole line of questions and story issues behind this drift to the dark side but dubious motivations, and turns of cute Disney sidekicks to the sinister aside, there's another aspect to this storyline that's pertinent to our modern world. The idea that angry household objects could take revenge, and/ or protect their turf, from intruders or visitors, is frightening.

And suddenly our Smart Homes and devices come into sharp focus.

Doing a little research as we started writing this article, we came across one in WIRED, titled Beauty and the Beast, Still a Cautionary Tale About the Smart Home, which was clearly thinking many of the same things, and stated the 'smart object' concerns wonderfully, so we thought we'd share some excerpts:
That’s not to say that things are all bad. Honestly, these are some great smart devices. They anticipate the needs of human/Beastly occupants perfectly. Mrs. Potts offers tea; Lumière dims the lights just at the right moments, while somehow escaping the incessant firmware upgrades that plague our real-world smart lights. They offer sound advice: When the Beast asks Cogsworth how he would know if he’s in love with Belle, Cogsworth responds by saying “You’ll feel slightly nauseous.” Would an Amazon Echo give it to you straight like that? Doubtful. 
... perhaps most importantly, the smart devices exhibit actual forethought, tweaking Belle’s environment to make her comfortable despite the Beast’s humbuggery—which ultimately creates the conditions for romance. 
Twenty-six years ago, all this animated meddling was adorable. (When a teapot sounds like Angela Lansbury, it does what it wants.) With the advent of CGI, though, the Beast’s castle seems to have relocated to be closer to the Uncanny Valley. Mrs. Potts looks like something you could pick up at an antique shop; Lumiere’s candles seem really to ignite. And in a time when connected devices can bicker and develop relationships, the repartee among the staff starts to feel less like a workplace sitcom and more like a dystopian sci-fi novel. 
... the most problematic device in the castle by far: the Beast’s magic mirror, a voice-activated screen that allows the user to view anyone, anywhere. (What does it think it is, a microwave?) (FTNH Ed: Or the camera on your smartphone or tablet?) Some might argue that the magic mirror’s invasions of privacy can be used for good, as when Belle discovers that her townspeople have apprehended her elderly father. The information allows her to save her father, or at least end up stuck in a locked—but not autonomous!—carriage with him. Just because surveillance can be used to fight crime, though, doesn’t make it a one-solution-fits-all technology. The first time the Beast uses the magic mirror, after all, it’s to spy on Belle in her room. He’s checking her out, and while the moment isn’t the slightest bit tawdry, it could have been. And when the magic mirror falls into the wrong hands, the device’s true sinister potential becomes clear...
As science barrels toward creating true 'AI' (artificial intelligence) at the same time as smart devices become more and more integrated into our daily lives, work and homes, the sinister scenario of S.A.R.A.H. (Self Actuated Residential Automated Habitat) becomes more and more possible.

The idea of object anthropomorphism is often behind how technology is created, though not usually consciously. While we don't really want our objects to be as smart as us (especially not with personalities that have opinions that differ from ours), making something 'user-friendly' is often about making the user feel comfortable and, well, friendly, toward the device/ program. By masking most of the technological workings and making them invisible - like magic! - and creating an interface (the way we use it) to require actions we use, both with other people (especially children, and others we're in charge of) and animals/pets, we become familiar (in the literal, and bordering on the folkloric, definition) with our machines. As a result it's not uncommon for people to get attached. (Try taking a phone away from someone who usually has it in their hands, or better still, don't...)

People inevitably, to an extent, get attached to machines they use regularly anyway (cars, boats etc). The drive for humans to connect, even to non-humans, is very strong, but there's an even deeper dynamic with smart devices - the devices which hold your information, passwords, preferences, memories, secrets and even hopes and dreams. Not only do people get attached, they become dependent, letting their guard down around their devices, making themselves vulnerable to losing regular skills (like navigating streets) but particularly to being taken advantage of by the invisible puppeteers behind the programs.

No, we're not in the age of AI devices (yet), but there is intelligence and motive, behind every one of the devices and apps we use - even if they're benign and/ or perceived as 'good' - and we would be less vulnerable if we remembered that. The responsibility is still ours. When we are taken advantage of it can't be blamed on the machine. It's 'user error'. Literally.

It may seem we've strayed far from the fairy tale and considerations about the 'love story' of Beauty and the Beast, but actually, it's quite 'on the nose'. Anna Vlasists, writer of the Wired article, puts it succinctly:
... while it’s tempting to blame the IoT (Internet of Teapots) for the bloodthirsty townspeople, or for the Beast’s fate soon thereafter, the true culprit isn’t the smart home... Only when the Beast falls in love with Belle does he breach his own best security practices, giving her the mirror that ultimately proves his downfall. A reminder to all who share their passcodes and devices: Love can make us hasty with our information. And that information—or misinformation—can do IRL harm.
Don't let the real invisible servants take advantage of you every day. Be smart with what you write, click and share. Protect your freedom. Be the user, not the used.

Note: We recently attended a special introduction to coding for kids, and it opened with a short video explanation of the importance of being able to use and/ or understand code, which boiled down to: "program or be programmed. "If you don't know what the software* you're using is for, you're not using it, but being used by it." The 2 minute introduction explains how to not be scared - or be taken advantage of - but how to be aware of how the internet and software on smart devices is used, so we can have a choice about it. You can view it HERE.

Monday, December 5, 2016

Today is the 100th Anniversary of the Gumnut Babies!

Today, 5th December, is the 100th anniversary of the publication of Gumnut Babies by May Gibbs! 
This teeny little book was the first in a huge and much beloved series in Australia, which included the popular Snugglepot and Cuddlepie, The Adventures of Ragged Blossom, and Little Obelia, introduced the concept of fairies in the Australian bush and landscape. 
May Gibbs, who adored Australian fauna and flora, saw the Australian bush as a magical place and these tiny creatures, and the supporting cast of talking animals and scary Banksia men, were characters she felt were constantly present but just beyond our vision. Her artistic depiction of Australian flora, in particular, was  - and remains - stunning and, with the aid of these Australia faerie characters, helped generations grow up with a special appreciation of the beauty in the harsh landscape of Australia and its potential for magic. She grew to be Australia's best-know and most enduring children's author. Though she didn't publish her first volume, Gumnut Babies, until she was 38, the popularity of her work meant that, unlike many other artists and writers of that era, she was able to make a living from her illustrations and writing.
Souriante (self portrait, smiling)
by May Gibbs, c.1923
First published on 5 December 1916, and retailing at one shilling and sixpence. the first print run of 3,000 books sold out before Christmas. The characters, cute, innocent anthropomorphised gumnuts and gum-blossoms were extremely popular with the war weary public in Australia. (source)
2016 marks the centenary of the publication of May Gibbs' Gumnut Babies. This much-loved book introduced Australian children to the Gumnut Babies, small imaginary inhabitants of the Australian bush. The Gumnut Babies resemble human babies but wear little gumnut hats and gumleaf girdles. The girls, called Gum Blossom Babies, wear frilly skirts made of eucalyptus blossom and have little blossom caps. These tiny fairies of the bush live among the gum trees with other bush babies, such as the Boronia Babies, Wattle Babies and Flannel Flower Babies.
The bushlands and wonderful wildflowers of the region gave May a deep and abiding love of Australian flora and fauna. After studying art in England, in 1913 she returned to Australia and wrote and illustrated Gumnut Babies, the first of her 18 books on a bush theme. May Gibbs' stories, illustrated with her watercolour and pen-and-ink drawings, are now regarded as classics of Australian children's literature.  (source)

When May Gibbs died in 1969, she left her estate to the United Nations Children’s Emergency Fund (UNICEF) and all her artworks, papers and copyright to the NSW Society for Crippled Children (now The Northcott Society) and the Spastic Centre of NSW (now the Cerebral Palsy Alliance). In 1970 the two charities presented the May Gibbs archive to the State Library of NSW.
                           
To celebrate this anniversary, the State Library of New South Wales is hosting a free display featuring the original illustrations and beautiful reproductions from May Gibbs' much loved children’s books.
 
May Gibbs: Celebrating 100 years is on display until 26 February 2017. (source)
You can read more about May Gibbs and her publishing HERE.
There are also, as you might expect, celebratory stamps, and a special envelope with coin and stamp collectible. (See above.) You can go collectible hunting HERE and HERE.

And, because our FTNH is particularly fond of May Gibbs (being her great-great aunt possibly has something to do with that), we are including some additional images specially selected for nostalgia.

Sunday, September 25, 2016

Short: "The Seven Red Hoods - Taupes"


This short film has nothing to do with Snow White, yet at the same time it's a completely delightful tribute.

This is more akin to Maria and the Seven Robbers (an Italian variation of Snow White) because this is actually a fun little crime story, (and not in the "Evil Queen has murderous intent" manner), with a Snow White twist. It would also work well as a very different beginning to the second act of Snow White, where she meets the dwarfs.



The designs have clear nods to the Disney film, as do some of the layouts, and the anthropomorphic animals add a humorous touch. Even a couple of the sequences echo the story, but not in a way you've seen before. We also loved the modeling - great mix of 3D and 2D techniques, giving it a storybook feel, while still obviously contemporary. It's clear why it made the Vimeo Staff Pick list.

We also thought it made for a delightful weekend watch. (Note: it's French but has English subtitles. Taupes is translated as Moles, unless we have misconstrued the meaning entirely.) 

Enjoy! 
We could have stayed much longer in this delightful world and hope to see more from this team soon.


A short film by Leo Verrier produced by Eddy and Arte Channel
Music: Pablo Pico
Sound: AOC
Models: Martine Lafont
Character Design: Maxime Mary
Anime Director: Jean-Baptiste Cumont

Saturday, January 10, 2015

In Discussion: "The Brave Little Toaster" & HC Andersen's Tragic Anthropomorphized Objects

The Steadfast Tin Soldier Shigeru Hatsuyama for Thumbelina (and other tales) (Japan, 1925)
Yes! This is one of my favorite things: when passionate discussions of lesser-known fairy tales appear in (seemingly unrelated) social media and pop culture/geek discussions!

If I were fancy and extra organized I'd start a whole series or regular feature on this topic. As it is, I will just add a new tag: #PopFTDiscussions (aka #GOLD!) Hopefully this new tag will have a lot of use in future...

So what incited this particular one, you ask? It was The Mary Sue's article "Anthropomorphizing the Mundane: Five Fictional Objects that Messed Us Up" by Sara Goodwin. Under the following picture of the Brave Little Toaster, the article begins:
toaster1
I was one of those kids who was absolutely convinced that my toys came to life when I was asleep and led full lives. Not only that, but I can remember getting out of bed to put a pair of shoes together so they wouldn’t have to spend the night alone. ... anthropomorphizing objects has been going on for many years in many cultures. Who doesn’t cry when they think about The Velveteen Rabbit and how badly he wanted to be real? 
"Tsukumo-gami,
Spirits of Used Articles"
by ITO Jakuchu
(1716-1800), Japan
Was Mary Poppins' Umbrella 100 yrs old?
And I was REALLY pleased to see that Tsukumogami was mentioned (the Japanese ritual/celebration of an object's 100th birthday), something which I learned more about last year and am completely delighted by. Another Japanese festival not mentioned is Hari-kuyo: Festival of Broken Needles which "is a solemn rite of respect and thanksgiving in which the worn and broken sewing needles used in the previous year are retired to a sacred resting place."

Interesting note: the most popular image representing Tsukumogami in general is an animated umbrella... *turns to look at Mary Poppins suspiciously*
In Japanese culture, there is a concept called Tsukumogami, which is popularly used to refer to an object that has reached its hundredth birthday and become alive. There seems to be a bit of a divide between the religious interpretations and the popular culture use of this word, but from what I can tell from some quick Google research is that it was commonly associated with religion in the past and has been adopted by modern cultures to describe a kind of anthropomorphism.  
Using animals, objects, etc. to tell a story can have practical uses beyond making us cry when we see a lamp that looks like that adorable, hopping Pixar lamp lying in a dumpster. 
It continues being a great read, complete with a list of Brave Little Toaster-like cousins we've all had tug at our heartstrings, so I suggest you hop on over there and read it in total. It succinctly looks at anthropomorphized objects on film we came to love, then cried for (hilarious), but then I began reading the comments and lo and behold, Hans Christian Anderson's name appeared, and not without a little rage attached! #painandtears 

The comments number well over 100 so I'm posting the HCA portion of the discussion here for your perusal. You can always go to the original page and join in the discussion if you become so inclined!
(Note: I have bleeped and asterix'd some of the language for gentler sensibilities and in an effort to redirect nastier versions of spam far, far away... and be warned that the spacing between comments is really, really weird. I don't have time to transcribe it all so it looks neat etc so please bear with the copy and paste results!)
by Kay Nielsen


Hans Christian Andersen was the -bleeping- worst with this, I swear to God. The man could have written a story from the POV of a tongue scraper and it would have been full of pathos, tragedy, and an unbearably sad ending.
^^ Edit FTNH: This sentence - now in bold, care of moi - is so true! ^^
F--- YOU HANS CHRISTIAN ANDERSEN, I AM NOT OVER THE FIR TREE OR THE STEADFAST TIN SOLDIER, AND I NEVER WILL BE
;A;
ETA: lmao I just checked his wikipedia page and look at this sh*t.
A very early fairy tale by Andersen called The Tallow Candle (Danish: Tællelyset) was discovered in a Danish archive in October 2012. The story, written in the 1820s, was about a candle who did not feel appreciated.
ridiculous.
by vacation-challenge

  • That's because candles are ***holes. Especially Danish ones.

  • The Andersen book I have is broken up into thematic sections. There is an entire "Anthropomorphic Objects and Animals" section in that book.

    • I remember that! The roots of my malady are slowly being exposed! :-)
    • by Angela Rizza

  • The Tin Soldier story confused me so much as a kid. I couldn't understand the point of a story where no one rescued him.

    • The point is pain and tears. 

      • Isn't that the point of all of Hans Christian Andersen's work? 

        • Not The Snow Queen, aka best fairy tale ever!
          But yeah everything else lol.

          • You forget: Frozen happened to that.



              • LALALALALA CAN'T HEAR YOU
                GERDA x KAI OTP, LITTLE ROBBER GIRL BEST SIDE CHARACTER, FABULOUS TRUE NEUTRAL SNOW QUEEN, CRYING AWAY MIRROR SHARDS AND SNATCHING UR FAVS' WIGS




                  • Please. Little Robber Girl/Gerda/Kai post-story friendship and eventual OT3 is where it's at. (SO p*ssed that they basically took all the side characters and turned them into Kristoff. YOU HAD A PERFECT CHANCE TO DO SOMETHING PROGRESSIVE WITH YOUR LINE FOR THE FIRST TIME SINCE LIKE THE 1930S, DISNEY, YOU HAD DAMN WELL BETTER MAKE UP FOR IT IN THE SEQUEL.)
                    (Seriously though I will forgive... not all, but like 65% of that movie's faults if they cash in on its mediocrity and give Elsa a female love interest. If we have to get a sequel, at least give us that.) 

              • That has ALWAYS been my favorite!



          • The point was that he fed on the tears of children. 

          • Totally! I'm so glad you mentioned him and his anthropomorphic ways! That fir tree .... and the Steadfast Tin Soldier .... why, Hans C.A.? Why?


            •   
              • from the Andrew Lang Yellow Fairy Book (by Henry Justice Ford)


              • OH MY GOD. I HAVE BEEN THINKING ABOUT THAT FIR TREE STORY FOR YEARS NOW.
                I had a picture book of it as a kid and I swear it's traumatized me for life as far as getting real Christmas trees go. I've told other people about it and no one else had heard of it. Their reactions to my summaries were pretty much all along the lines of "J---- C-----!" Looked on amazon and google for Christmas tree children's books, but do you know how many Christmas tree books there are?
                So thank you. (And omg I should have known it was HCA! *shakes fist*)
                ETA: No really. I even described to people how the Christmas Tree felt pain after it was chopped down but bore through it because it was so happy to covered in decorations and lights, just like the Little Mermaid when she got her feet. Fffffffffu- I SHOULD HAVE KNOWN!
                • by P.J. Lynch


                • I'm happy to help you recall your childhood trauma.
                  Mine involves a Mercer Meyer book about a sad rabbit whose friends all forget her birthday and okay I really can't talk about it. Even though they all throw her a surprise party at the end, it does nothing, NOTHING, to make up for the fathomless depths of pain she and the reader have suffered.

              • Apparently a friend of his made a bet with him that he couldn't write a story that would make people feel sympathy for a pin. Hans won the bet
                .
              • *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*
              Studio Soyuzmultfilm in 1976
              Ah yes:
              "..he fed on the tears of children...".

              Thank you Ms. Goodwin. I will never forget that throwaway comment now. It's fits so very,very well.. (Sorry Mr. Andersen. It was bound to happen when you made us love your characters and then- *neck slicing motion with SFX*!)

              Here is an evil IKEA commercial (brought to our attention by the same Ms. Goodwin) that will not help you at all:
              Told you it was evil. (You had to look...)