Author: James Chiang

Saboteurs & Saviours: Part 1

The combination of Jeremy Irons’ voice acting and Andreas Deja’s magnificent design/animation helped make the sly and charming character Scar into one of Disney’s best villians and saboteurs. From The Lion King.

Being an artist is hard. The promise of true freedom, honest self-expression, and joyful meaningfulness is often met with harsh and seemingly insurmountable obstacles. Those obstacles are the Saboteurs to your creativity calling.

“… any act that derives from our higher nature instead of our lower… will elicit Resistance.” — Steven Pressfield, Writer

There are the outside malignant forces — frustrating and emotionally challenging hindrances that seem to work in collusion to impair your way towards your inner evolution: the boss that hates you; the co-worker whose negative and judgemental outlook/energy pulls you down with him; society’s sometimes unfair or non-sensical legal/bureaucratic barriers to your creative endeavour/ education/entrepeneurship; the lack of start-up money/social connections/privileges that others seem to possess as a birthright; the spouse or partner who fears that your commitment to your craft takes away your commitment to their individual selves; the friends and family who have absolutely no faith in you; the friends and family who like you but only as you are (or were) and prefer that you don’t ever change or grow to become anything that’s different. Like many artists before me and after, I’ve experienced nearly all of the above. They are all difficult obstacles to creative living. We have to fight them, ignore them, weave around them, discard them or sometimes just blow right past them as if they didn’t exist. The creative (genius) must never compromise.

Delicious magic from Japan’s most uncompromising Sushi Master, Chef Jiro Ono, from the documentary, Jiro Dreams of Sushi.

But as nasty as these obstacles can be, they are on the outside, and what matters more significantly is what happens on the inside, in your mind, for the biggest enemy lies within. Writer and creative inspiration extraordinaire Steven Pressfield calls it resistance. Others, more scientifically inclined, might call it entropy. I call it the ego — that invisible force that will do anything and everything to stop you from reaching your fullest potential and thereby denying you and the world of the gift(s) that only you can bring to fruition. It will prevent you from living with truth and honour, teasing you with the allure of pleasure and quick success. It will appease your pride and sense of greed. It will inflame your ambition and endorse conflict and envy. And worse of all, It will turn your passion — the love of your art — into a mere means for the acquistion of material power and social glory should you make it your occupation. And, at the end of it, it will eliminate all your humility and crush any sense of gratitude or empathy for others. The ego is the ultimate saboteur and it resides deep inside your brain. You’ve given it a home the day you developed self-consciousness and brought up to conform to society’s customary rules and traditions. You need to look very closely, with utmost clarity and humility, to even see its shadowy nature as it tries to take hold of you.

“Perceive that which cannot be seen with the eye.” — Miyamoto Musashi, Samurai/Writer

What can be done about the ego and how can we live with it? Endless books, scientific, spiritual and otherwise, have attempted to answer this question and have yet to offer any real pragmatic solution. Most people aren’t even aware of it or if they are, they’ve come to accept it as an inevitable unchangeable reality. But the real truth is that while the ego is both present and elusive, it is, in reality, like all other mental constructs, nothing more than an idea. It’s a kind of illusory beast we’ve created in our minds that has convinced us to believe that it’s not only real but bigger and more important than anything else in the world, no matter time or place. That’s how smart it is — it’s a master negotiator, a superb accountant and a biting critic. And it will use as much “logic” as possible to convince us to be lazy (like looking for shortcuts), to doubt ourselves or our ideas (such as using extensive rationalizations/analysis to prolong taking action), or to quit while we’re still ahead (so that we never ever finish anything, thus justifying the lack of value in our contribution). Essentially, it’ll do anything to stop us from giving any loving attention to our inner aspirations or destiny.

“The ego mind both professes its desire for love and does everything possible to repel it, or if it gets here anyway, to sabotage it. ” — Marianne Williamson, Writer

And because it turns on as soon as our consciousness is awake, we never rest from it. The ego is always talking, always “working” us. It knows the power of words and likes to come across as both strong and careful, meanwhile bolstering its position by gathering more “in-line” data to give extra strength to its arguments. It breeds insecurity and thus makes us prime targets for propaganda and persuasion from the external forms of sabotage like the doubting friend or family member. Sometimes it might even take the form of false humility like self-loathing. It loves to follow the trend and give in to conformity. It loves tribalism — convincing us that our own family, work tribe, race or nation is above others. It endorses competition and conflict — anger, fear, and aggression make regular appearances — even as it condemns the violence of others who won’t side with its own ideologies.

And, even when the ego recognizes that its solutions or guidance have resulted in failure, it accepts no responsibility because the dark egoic mind likes to look back, not forward. Instead, it prefers to find things to blame, like other people, the government or the “system” rather than focus on what’s been learnt and where the solutions might lie. It always wants us to focus on the things outside of us rather than on the inside, so that we don’t see its machinations. In fact, it’s scared of the new so it always guides us back to the known (tradition) in sacrifice of the new (discovery). But its nastiest trick is that it lures us into thinking we are one, and that it’s here to serve our best interest but in truth it loves only itself, its own self-preservation and entices us to do the same by endorsing individualism, self-preoccupation and self-aggrandizement. In the form of its extreme culmination — narcissism — it destroys all that is kind or creative, and all that is holy or wholesome.

“Thought is on the outside.” — J. Krishnmurti, Philosopher

Once we see the ego for what it truly is — an ILLUSION — we’ll realize and understand that its persuasions, like most of our thoughts, are ultimately identifiable and absurd, no more than irritating, pre-digested chatter disguised as intelligence. Once we see that, we know that they can be overcome and discarded. Like weeds in a garden, they can be extracted even if they should continue to sprout. We need to take a farmer’s mindset of commitment and professionalism. We stay on guard and don’t accept the ego’s lies or compromise our truth. But at the same time, we must realize another truth; that it shouldn’t be surprising that most people lose their battle against the ego. It has craftfully deceived us, so why wouldn’t it deceive others? We must have empathy so that we can also be kind to ourselves. Dealing with saboteurs need not imply stomping out our obstacles with glee or anger because outward violence always begets more inward violence and vice versa. And finally, the most effective statement we can make about the ego is that it ALWAYS makes it both RATIONAL and EASY to be suspicious, dispassionate, or undisciplined towards your creative endeavour, even though giving up your creative passion will ultimately leave you a crater-sized hole of regret that will sit in your heart for the rest of your lifetime. (To be continued)

Yoda shares his wisdom. From George Lucas’ original Star Wars.

In Part 2 of Saboteurs and Saviours, we will discuss the ego-opposing forces that empower our creative drive and help us reach our fullest potential.

A Bit about Acting

The irreplaceable Meryl Streep, an actor of many faces and characters, each one unique, convincing and larger than life.

“I believe in imagination. I did Kramer vs. Kramer before I had children. But the mother I would be was already inside me.”

— Meryl Streep, Actor

Acting is hard. That’s the first thing one has to acknowledge when one begins to study its form. Some would even say that actors are born and not made. For visual artists, such as animators, acting is something quite elusive; we’re given the task of acting, with little to no training in it. Let’s face the fact: most animators are nothing more than “ham” actors at best. Still, we have a job to do, which is to give a convincing performance. Through our control of shape and movement, down to the smallest pixel and fractions (1/24th) of a second, we must make our characters live as a real living actor would. Thus, it would make paramount sense, if not a necessity, to study what it means to act and the various schools of thought in the acting world.

History:

Acting goes as far back as Ancient Greek theatre where plays were performed on a semi-circular raised stage called a theatron, as early as 6th Century B.C. Its format and popularity spread throughout the Mediterrannean. Stage actors donned elaborately designed masks which represented “personas” — which is where the word “person” comes from — and played parts or roles in a drama, which was a story that was larger than life and often tied to the mystical. In the East, theatre and acting had its own forms of dramatic storytelling such as the Kathakali in India, or Noh Theatre and Kabuki in Japan, each one a form of song and dance performance that told rich stories associated with Gods and Demons, not unlike that of Greek or Roman mythology.

Today, due to the advancement of technology — by which we’re referring mostly to the freedom of the camera — acting has taken on more specific styles of performance. The broadness of a stage performance changed. Long Shots (where characters are framed full bodied) dictated more suitability for action or comedy. While medium and close up shots (where only a portion of the body is seen), were saved for drama. Shot selection also gave directors freedom to express an idea with just the shot, even if an actor did little in terms of action. Subtlety was gradually introduced, both in live action and animation. Still, acting required action, for that is the root of its word. Stillness was relative, and like all art, it’s the build up and contrast in acting and shot sequencing that gave texture and tension to the filmmaking. Good actors never forget that it is through action that an idea or emotion is expressed, and this skill and its control takes many many years to develop.

Schools of Acting:

There are 5 major schools of acting and the following is only a very rudimentary introduction to those famous acting styles. What’s most important is to remember that acting is not just action, but also an expression of an idea, story and emotion that makes a character believable, real and interesting. It’s a tall task for any artist. For those who work in animation, it would be valuable to understand at least the basics of what acting is and can be; we must learn to observe what a real actor does and why. Only then can we have any hope of making the best use of our craft to create something honest and special to the craft of animation, which has it own unique characteristics that make it different from a physical acting performance.

Classical:

Founded by Konstantin Stanislavski — his famous book, An Actor Prepares should be on every serious actor’s or animator’s shelf — the classical method is the most foundational form of acting on stage and in films. Founded on the idea of using one’s experiences and emotions to find the right connections to a character one is playing, this methodology puts the actor in the mindset of the character after long and carefully studied preparation. The Stanislavski method requires serious concentration and elaborate character analysis as well as learning voice and physical skills to create a convincing performance. Almost all other acting methodologies have their roots in Stanislavski’s system.

Checkhov:

Founded by Stanislavki’s student Michael Chekhov, the Checkhov Technique is a psycho-social approach to acting, bringing the performer closer towards a mind-body transformation. The actor here internalizes the problems of the character and finds a gestural way of expressing his story. The idea is that performance comes via physical memory at the unconscious level, thus bringing about a more honest performance at the conscious level. Here, physical action is a result of a merger of mind and body. It’s proponents include actors like Clint Eastwood, Lloyd Bridges, Jack Nicholson and Marilyn Monroe.

Method:

The Method technique, founded by Lee Stralsberg, is also rooted from Stanislavski but builds on it, encouraging an actor to dig very deeply into personal emotions and memories. Things such as sense memory (physical sensations tied to emotional events) and affective memory (memories from a similar situation) are developed, allowing the actor to behave more “in character.” Some altered forms of method acting, such as that led by Stella Adler, encourage more imagination in the creation process and less “all out” becoming of a character all of the time which can pose dangerous psychological issues and burn out for the actor. (See what Meryl Streep had to say after using Method Acting for her role in The Devil Wears Prada.) Still, the Method techniques have produced some of the most powerful actors ever including such stalwarts as Dustin Hoffman, Christian Bale, Daniel Day-Lewis, Robert DeNiro and Marlon Brando (the latter two being more devout devotees to Stella Adler’s version).

Meissner

This school of acting, created by Sanford Meissner in New York, famously uses repetition exercises — acting exercises that encourage the actor to explore actions and reactions to an identical given phrase. Due to changes that occur in meaning, tone and intensity while using the same words, one actor’s behaviour alters the behaviour of the other. This methodology is sometimes referred to as improvisational acting where the actor is responding more reflexively and naturally to a situation and is very effective in two-character interactions. The phrase “acting is reacting” comes from this methodology, which allows for more free and spontaneous performance both vocally and physically. Actors in the Meissner mold include Diane Keaton, Kristoff Waltz, James Gandolfini and Grace Kelly.

Practical Aesthetics

This more modern school of acting (often referred to as the Atlantic School) joins both Classical Stanislavski and Meissner methods while incorporating ideas from the Stoic philosophers such as Aristotle and Epictetus. Created by director/playwright David Mamet and actor William H. Macy, the core idea springs around creation and response as coming from the actor rather than the character. Its techniques are built around motivation from the actor within the situation and is considered a more practical approach to acting by demystifying the acting process. Repetition, Performance Technique and Script Analysis are the means for actors to develop the mental and physical skills necessary. Its proponents include the likes of Rose Byrne, William H. Macy and Felicity Huffman.

Conclusion:

Animators rarely take acting classes. This means that we know very little about what it means to be on an actual stage or film set. But what visual artists can do is explore and study the performances of good actors, including that of good animators. How an artist gets inside a character, how he chooses to move the body is important. An animator can never produce the presence or subtle look with an impact on screen like a great live actor would — for there are just too many nuances that make live acting exceptionally powerful and thus, irreplaceable — but we can do something else. Firstly, being unconfined to the limitations of our bodies, we can do almost anything we want with our imaginations and make it look real. Secondly, animators have another distinct advantage — we can see and design the movement in real-time because we can see our characters performances while animating; a live actor will always have to depend on and trust the director that his staging and posing looks good and right. This makes the animation process much more a construction rather than a performance, allowing time to tweak and adjust our vision as we create. The live actor must perform on the fly, like a musician or an athlete. This explains one of the reasons why good actors seek out good directors.

Now, that said, the live actor is a serious actor, a real one. The animator is not. After many years in training and development of their craft, live actors truly build, create and then execute their performance, mind, body and voice, for that is the language of their craft. Animators are visual artists — our language is in shapes and movement of those shapes on screen. Any animator who thinks they can just hop in front of a camera and act, then copy the recording frame by frame for translation on to his character model/rig, would be a fool to believe that his/her performance is actually any good (there are exceptions, of course). This probably explains why there is so much bland and wooden acting in animated films today since there is such extensive over-reliance on self-shot video reference. Animators should never forget that the strength and wonder of animation lies in its imagination and the mastery of its techniques such as weight and design; we can design the physicality and the movement with utmost precision towards a unique and orderly personal vision. The exercise is an exercise of the mind.

Stella Adler, a protégé of Stanislavski’s, created a school of acting that promoted the idea that the actor use his imagination to create the character’s world rather than just his personal experiences or memories.

“The actor has to develop his body. The actor has to work on his voice. But the most important thing the actor has to work on is his mind.”

— Stella Adler, Actor/Teacher