WTF?

the format, function, and fabulousness of animated GIFs as an emerging 21st-c. medium

 

#tags:

Reaction | Scene Analysis | Transformative

News | Poster Art 

Yeah so bee-tee-dubs so all five of you who follow this blog:

I’m-a start updating it again because I am going to start writing my book. If you want to unfollow it, feel free. 

Alternatively, if you want to submit me GIFs doing cool things, that would be awesome. 

Introduction: Episode IV A New Medium

No official academic research on GIFs yet exists. That must be established immediately in order to explain the dual purposes this body of work intends to accomplish.  One can only guess why no theorists have attempted to analyse the GIF.  As an image format, the GIF has existed for twenty-five years—certainly long enough to prove itself interesting to some searching academic’s eye. Yet it stayed ignored.  Only in the last three years has the GIF begun to draw attention—from bloggers and media journalists rather than academics. Julia Knight emphasises a similar pattern that plagued British video art. She argues that British video art suffered “exclusion from the art establishment” (1996: 2) from three directions: “at the levels of funding, exhibition, and critical writing” (1996: 2). Without engendering a debate as to whether a form of technology needs to be considered art in order to operate as a medium or whether acceptance as an art form should be the primary goal of the GIF—others may take up the yoke of those inquiries if they wish—Knight prompts a useful rubric for appreciating the importance of academic examination. Given the ideals behind such concepts like open source and fair use policies that help govern Internet culture, one can dismiss the relevance of funding. Exhibition likewise doesn’t operate as a prohibition to the GIF; in March 2013 Google launched a search feature exclusively for GIFs (Kane, 2013).  Within academia, however, a “persistent gap” (Knight, 1996: 2) continues between the activity within current culture and any official recognition or exploration of said activity. To use Knight’s description, there has “remained a stubborn dearth of critical writing” (1996: 2). Therefore this body of work aims to accomplish two ambitions. The desire to understand the sudden shift in the GIF’s identity in the current cultural zeitgeist, as demonstrated by its meteoric rise in prominence, encapsulates one objective; the other objective follows the same goal Julia Knight desired to accomplish with her anthology Diverse Practices: to “[fill] that persistent gap” (1996: 2).

By incorporating kinesics, he developed a new communication model, one that operates on multiple channels. “We cannot investigate communication by isolating and measuring one channel, the acoustic (that is, the sound-sending and sound-receiving channel),” Birdwhistell wrote. “Communication, upon investigation, appears to be a system which makes use of the channels of all of the sensory modalities” (1970: 70) In this way, communication is a matter of designed redundancy (Birdwhistell, 1970: 107). Rather than a verbal message transposed from sender to receiver, communication occurs between two people as an on-going exchange on multiple levels simultaneously. Communication through different channels allows reinforcement of the intended message. “Redundancy … makes the contents of messages available to a greater portion of the population than would be possible if only one modality were utilised to teach, learn, store, transmit, or structure experience” (1970: 107).

Given that the Internet extends across the world, the potential for misunderstanding between people due to cultural differences increases. Communication via text alone—the transformation of the spoken word into the written word along the acoustic channel—decreases the likelihood that a message will be understood when compared to a message communicated across multiple sensory channels. The ability to receive both acoustic and kinesic information very likely would increase cross-cultural communication online. It can be argued that this supplies the reason for the popularity and success of the reaction GIF. When amended to text posts, the reaction GIF supplies addition reinforcement of the message through the kinesics channel.

this is an eric kripke hate blog

stopcallingmebitch:

here are some gems from a season 3 interview:

“We got to wipe the slate clean and move on to the next escalation which is, it’s a world at war. It’s this secret war that’s going on and we try to actually draw as many modern day parallels as possible because the demons operate in a very terrorist-cell model.”

image

“You’re going to see Gordon again. Gordon is… Bad things, bad things are in store for Gordon!” 

“For us, the best episodes are the ones about shades of grey. And it’s always the ones where the decisions the boys have to make are really morally troubling,” Kripke says. “In Gordon Walker we had that hunter who was taking it to that level of being a facist or in a way, like we sometimes like to call him, a ‘human supremacist.’”

image

…one of the second season episodes had Sam falling for a woman who turns out to be a werewolf. “Behind the scenes we laughed that that was ‘Supernatural”s version of Old Yeller,” says Kripke. “You know, because it’s like, ‘I love her!’ ‘You have to take her out back and shoot her, son!’ ‘Okay!’ And then there’s that gun shot. But I was very pleased with that episode.”

image

IN CONCLUSION

image

this is an eric kripke hate blog

coffeeofacoffee:

I guess today was judgement day then because I can now officially judge Eric Kripke (who was getting at least a seminal benefit of my doubt for bailing at the end of S5).

I never felt it was an accident SUPERNATURAL was the way it was but I never got to know how much that was down to him - I strongly supected, however, it was highly unlikely he couldn’t responsible for some of it, yet my suspicions remained unconfirmed. Well, until now.

I’ve made some points, I know some might disagree but bear with me, it’s late.

christmassbutt:

stopcallingmebitch:

here are some gems from a season 3 interview:

“We got to wipe the slate clean and move on to the next escalation which is, it’s a world at war. It’s this secret war that’s going on and we try to actually draw as many modern day parallels as possible because the demons operate in a very terrorist-cell model.”

image

I guess killing all the demon-blood kids from your inability to draw a plot together properly is “wiping the board clean” - in which the only gay characters on this show both end up dead, followed by the obligatory PoC and women.

Also.

Wow, who knew vindication would come this fast:


sissydaredevil:  &&I dont understand this post&&   lol apoeticmindset:  as ex-military I find this utterly funny. You know why? This show actually shows and discusses the effect that living as a soldier has on your psychological wellbeing and ability to cope with the world. The fact that it is clear that Dean and Sam are deeply, deeply damaged by these roles yet still stick with them is a good example of military indocrination and its effects. There is NOTHING propagandhic about Supernatural.  Yeah but I think the minute you show two very good-looking white guys being all ‘heroic’ and shit. Nobody is going to care about their ‘damage’ it’s all about how butch you can be and how much shit you can kill and how you can be just like Sam and Dean - who get to tap that with gorgeous girls, remain good-looking, and save the world. And despite the ‘damage’ they never kill anyone they didn’t intend to kill, or want to kill anyway, no one ever has a breakdown that sticks, no one hits bottom with their alcoholism, no one becomes permanently disabled (remember how upset Bobby was when he lost the use of his legs - when it wasn’t really that unexpected a possibility given what they do - in fact it was better than losing a limb entirely - and how it DIDN’T STICK), no one becomes dysfunctional and abusive in a way that makes them completely and permanently alienated and reviled from those they love, or in prison, nobody rapes anybody (unless it’s demons literally raping their souls). Oh, and most importantly, nobody changes FOR THE BETTER, reverses their world philosophy (unless they’re a white guy who happens to be a monster and he’s suddenly now on Team Humanity - which still includes killing things that may or may not be human), or - most significantly - benefits from refuting/refusing that indoctrination and choosing their own way to live. So it’s propagandic in that it’s had the TV makeover. Which is why I refer to it as propaganda. The minute the writers get bored of Dean’s STD then he either won’t have it anymore or he’ll have some kind of miracle healing session and: voila! Or, you know, he’ll be so badass that he doesn’t need it, he just stops it by being Dean Winchester, you know? Oh, and why are they FOREVER throwing Sam’s character under a bus because he doesn’t want to be in the life? Is it normal to character assassinate one of the leads because his character chooses something other than his ‘indoctrination’ to live by? Why does it always directly infer that he is duplicitous, mysterious, and evil? Why is he consistently shown as an epic fuck up, and someone who bails at the earliest convenience? Why does NOTHING good ever come from his turning his back on the life despite his being manipulated into it? Despite his entire family being manipulated into it? Why is it that the minute he’s not following his brother’s orders, or being badgered by his brother, that he is consistently going to make a bad decision? Despite him being depicted more frequently as the more ‘intelligent’ (or is that just the more ‘educated’ in which case his eductation as depicted has been nothing more than a hindrance to his ability to take and follow orders - why present it that way)? Whereas Dean’s inability to grow a pair and live his own life outside of someone else’s orders or ideology isn’t shown as either: a) Something he now has chosen to make his own philosophy (which I could deal with because it would be his choice); b) Or something he is ever likely to grow out of; It’s consistently represented as Dean’s heroic martyrdom. And given that he’s not a soldier and his father was often away from he and his brother - AND given Bobby’s influence - it’s not entirely clear why he responds like he’s a military man whose been in service all his life. It’s one of those moments where the metaphoric parallel they’re making doesn’t quite match up. If he considers himself a soldier and he respects his father’s philosophy so much that it has long become his own, then for God’s sake let him own it. It’s already pitifully obvious that he LOVES torturing and killing things. Just fucking own it already. And stop the Saint Dean who kills indiscriminately but loathes himself for it. It’s fucking old. And it’s just not true. Oh, and that’s even before I get to the clusterfuck that is Castiel’s turn-on-a-pin characterisation. I can’t even deal with him anymore. They’ve made a big point of having Castiel state that he actually IS a soldier - one of God, no less - and it seems pretty clear to me now that Castiel becomes useless every time he’s not following Dean’s directive. So we’re stuck with yet another character that can’t have agency outside of Dean’s direction. All I’m saying is that before I settled on that interpretation, I really couldn’t figure out what the fuck the SPN writers were trying to do with their characters.Oh and here’s the cherry on the crap sundae: WTF with the consistently negative portrayal of women and black men. They’re like 90% likely to be evil, and just as likely to die (in the case of black men - they ALL end up dead, and they all get played as Scary Black Guy). Really?Is that real life? Or is that real life ACCORDING TO THIS SHOW? Is it really a good idea to consistently negatively portray both women and black men and place white males as the only consistent ‘good guy’. The only group capable of *coming back from the dead* to fight the good fight? Really?That’s accurate?I think not.

“You’re going to see Gordon again. Gordon is… Bad things, bad things are in store for Gordon!” 

“For us, the best episodes are the ones about shades of grey. And it’s always the ones where the decisions the boys have to make are really morally troubling,” Kripke says. “In Gordon Walker we had that hunter who was taking it to that level of being a facist or in a way, like we sometimes like to call him, a ‘human supremacist.’”

image

 

I knew Gordon was written to be a Scary Black Guy hate figure. You get clued in the minute he starts threatening some white chick - a motif they seem to like repeating on this show because just how many gosh darned times it actually turns up - and killing his white best friend because he turned into some monster - though the portrayal pretty much argues that he was really a monster all along - it’s that hilarity again. (Ever notice how threatening mobs or groups, or even simply Team Evil always manage to include several black guys that Team Good fails to?)

And, oh, the fantastic-racist black guy, white guys love writing that one (almost as much as the Ethnic Princess Privilege) - and they think they’re being SO CLEVER and SO ORIGINAL when they do it because TEE-HEE hilarity. So, of course, Uriel had to be one too. Yeah, it gets more hilarious every time I see it. Not. Kind of makes it mandatory that they get killed off.

I presume this would be why every black guy on screen for the last few seasons is dead the minute he turns up - it’s not even by the end of the ep anymore, it’s by the end of the ACT he turns up in. And it doesn’t end with Kripke. Case in point, how many black guys have appeared this season so far? How many are dead? Go back to last season. And then the season before. And if all you’ve got is Joshua to bridge your arguement (Alpha Vamp is pending, people, he was dead the minute he inexplicably started kidnapping white kids only - though it made NO SENSE for him to do so) then you realise that’s a percentage of pretty much 95% dead - any justification of this will = argument invalid.

One wonders where all the white supemacists are in the SUPERNATURAL universe. Maybe they’re getting mistaken for hunters. Or hunters getting mistaken for white supremacists. Maybe they’re like unicorns and don’t actually exist? Oh wait, unicorns actually do exist on SUPERNATURAL…so white supremacists of any kind are ACTUALLY rarer than unicorns on this show?

Gif, says it all.

…one of the second season episodes had Sam falling for a woman who turns out to be a werewolf. “Behind the scenes we laughed that that was ‘Supernatural”s version of Old Yeller,” says Kripke. “You know, because it’s like, ‘I love her!’ ‘You have to take her out back and shoot her, son!’ ‘Okay!’ And then there’s that gun shot. But I was very pleased with that episode.”

image

Okay, you know what? GOOD! I am so fucking glad to have his obnoxious quote with this because I FUCKING HATED THAT EPISODE. I hated Sera Gamble for fucking writing it. However seeing as he thought it was oh-so-funny, who knows if it was even her idea. Maybe they got their yuks in the writing room by giving the most misogynist story ideas to the one female writer still sticking it out in the boys club? It also has a built in apologia (much like Gamble’s run as show runner): How can this be misogynist when it was written by a woman? Oh hai guyz we can make this even MORE MISOGYNIST now that we’ve got a female show runner - even more hilarity. Not.

At least I can stop hating her and her alone for that ep.

Seriously, they find out Madison, is a werewolf, they discover that she won’t change if she stays awake the entire night the moon is in phase, they know she could simply lock herself down if necessary but they CHOOSE to shoot her in the head. And then they make it all about the white dudebros pain.  Are they serious? Wow, I wanted to shoot that episode into a fiery space death, it was so repugnant.

IN CONCLUSION

image