ANIMATOR’S HELL:

AN ANIMATION INSPIRED BY SARTRE’S OTHER

A Master’s Thesis

by
NADİDE GİZEM AKGÜLGİL

Department of
Graphic Design
İhsan Doğramacı Bilkent University
May 2012
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
To my beloved grandparents Ali Akkaya and Fatma Akkaya…
 ANIMATOR’S HELL:
AN ANIMATION INSPIRED BY SARTRE’S OTHER

Graduate School of Economics and Social Sciences

of
İhsan Doğramacı Bilkent University

by

NADİDE GİZEM AKGÜLGİL

In Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Degree of

MASTER OF FINE ARTS

in

THE DEPARTMENT OF
GRAPHIC DESIGN
İHSAN DOĞRAMACI BİLKENT UNIVERSITY
ANKARA

May 2012
I certify that I have read this thesis and have found that it is fully adequate, in
scope and in quality, as a thesis for the degree of Master of Fine Arts in Graphic
Design.

……………………………………
Assist. Prof. Dr. Dilek Kaya
Supervisor

I certify that I have read this thesis and have found that it is fully adequate, in
scope and in quality, as a thesis for the degree of Master of Fine Arts in Graphic
Design.

 
………………………………………………  
Dr. Özlem Özkal
Examining Committee Member

I certify that I have read this thesis and have found that it is fully adequate, in
scope and in quality, as a thesis for the degree of Master of Fine Arts in Graphic
Design.

 
……………………………………………….  
Assist. Prof. Dr. Ersan Ocak
Examining Committee Member

Approval of the Graduate School of Economics and Social Sciences

 
…………………………………………….  
Prof. Dr. Erdal Erel
Director
 
 ABSTRACT

ANIMATOR’S HELL: AN ANIMATION INSPIRED BY

SARTRE’S OTHER
Akgülgil, Nadide Gizem

M.F.A., Department of Graphic Design

Supervisor: Assist. Prof. Dr. Dilek Kaya

May 2012

Animation is a form that allows the animator to enter a world of impossibilities.

Things that are hard or impossible to show in live action become easier or
possible in animation. The animator as a subject animates an object that has no
life, soul and movement. So the whole relationship is between the subject and
object.

French philosopher Sartre, on the other hand, plays with the concepts of subject
and object when he constructs his philosophy on existence especially in Other
concept. When a man confronts with another one, he puts the other in an object
form in his world. As the one does so, the other also does the same, i.e. puts the
other in an object form. When they confront and become objects for the other’s
world they start judging each other. The Other, for this reason, is hell, according
to Sartre.

Animator’s Hell is a clay animation, which attempts to integrate Jean Paul Sartre’s
concepts of subject - object relations and the Other into animation. It tells the
story of an animator who defines an object for her animation but later faces with
the fact that it is actually a subject. The characters in the film become hell for each
other, and try to be recognized.

Keywords: Animation, Sartre, Other, Subject, Object

iii    
 ÖZET

ANİMATÖRÜN CEHENNEMİ: SARTRE’IN ÖTEKİ

KAVRAMINDAN ESİNLENİLMİŞ BİR ANİMASYON
Akgülgil, Nadide Gizem

Yüksek Lisans, Grafik Tasarım Bölümü

Tez Yöneticisi: Yrd. Doç. Dr. Dilek Kaya

Mayıs 2012

Animasyon, animatöre imkansızlıklar dünyasına girmesine izin veren bir

formdur. Canlı çekimlerde göstermesi zor ya da imkansız olan şeyler animasyon
evreninde daha kolay ve mümkün hale gelir. Bir özne olan animatör, yaşamı,
ruhu ve hareketi olmayan nesneleri canlandırır. Bu durumda tüm ilişki özne ve
nesne arasındadır.

Diğer yandan, Fransız filozof Sartre varoluş üzerine felsefesini kurarken ve

özellikle Öteki kavramını anlatırken özne ve nesne kavramlarıyla oynar. Kişi bir
başkasıyla karşılaştığında, onu kendi dünyasında nesne konumuna koyar.
Kişinin yaptığı bu davranışın aynısını diğeri de yapar. Karşılaşıp birbirlerinin
dünyasında nesne konumuna geldiklerinde birbirlerini yargılamaya başlarlar. Bu
nedenle Sartre’a göre Öteki cehennemdir.

Animatörün Cehennemi Sartre’ın bu düşüncesini animasyon içerisine yerleştiren

bir projedir. Animasyon, animatörün nesne olarak yaklaştığı formun aslında
özne oluşuyla karşılaşmasını anlatır. Animatör ve nesne birbirleri için
cehenneme dönüşür ve birbirleri tarafından tanınmaya çalışırlar.

Anahtar Sözcükler: Animasyon, Sartre, Öteki, Özne, Nesne

iv    
 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

First of all, this project was born from confusion in my mind. In this painful era

my supervisor Assist. Prof. Dr. Dilek Kaya directed me to different paths and

accepted my passion on both animation and Sartre’s philosophy, which I am

grateful to her. I also want to thank Dr. Özlem Özkal for teaching and supporting

me during the first year of my education in Bilkent University and also for her

critics about this project. Assist. Prof. Dr. Ersan Ocak was a person that I hear

and eager to meet for a long time. I feel myself very lucky that I had the chance

to discuss my project with him and his critics were very crucial for the project as

they created the inspiration for me. Assist. Prof. Dr. Elif Çırakman is another

person that I am grateful to. Her lecture on Sartre in my undergraduate degree in

METU was very effective so that I chose to study on this issue. She also never

declined my requests and showed me the solutions where I stuck. My instructor

Orhan İktu was one of the people who supported me both academically and

technically. During this process he was one of the crucial person in the team so I

want to thank him too.

This project came alive with the help of my beloved siblings and colleagues

Zeynep Engin and Begüm Bilgenoğlu. They were always ready to help me when

v    
I needed them and they were into every step of this project as angels. I want to

thank to my 20-year-friend and also my sibling Hande Çilingir for her acceptance

of unquestioned help. In this difficult process, my close friends and brothers

Furkan Devran and Ekin Berkyürek were always supportive and they are there

for me every time I feel unsatisfactory. I’m thankful to Sinem Aydınlı for her

great friendship and enlightening my way. I’m also grateful to Şahin Akgül,

Necati Telli and Sami Arpa for their friendship, support and listening to me with

patience every time I complain.

Gönenç Mutlu was maybe the one that feels the burden and difficulty of this

project as I do. Besides his contributions to the film, he was the one who pulls me

over when I feel like drowning. In the first half of the project he was far away

from me but he still made me feel his support. He was eager to help and

contribute in each phase of the project. His love and trust made me to continue

every time I gave up.

Finally I want to thank my family who patiently waited for me to get over this

process. Nalan Akgülgil and Ümit Akgülgil supported me and respected my

decisions. They were silent and receptive when I was aggressive and offensive

with the burden of the project’s difficulty. My brother Onur Akgülgil was not

aware of the whole process but he was always interested and I want to thank

him for being a great brother to me.

vi    
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABSTRACT…………………………………………………………………………...iii

ÖZET………………………………………………………………………………….iv

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS……………………………………………………………v

TABLE OF CONTENTS…………………………………………………………....vii

LIST OF FIGURES…………………………………………………………………...ix

CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION…………………………………………………....1

CHAPTER II: LITERATURE REVIEW………………………………………..….. 6

2.1 Sartre’s Exitentialist Philosophy and His Concept of the Other…….6

2.2 An Overview of the Critical Literature on Animation…….………..13

CHAPTER III: THE PROJECT: ANIMATOR’S HELL…...........…………..……..20

3.1 The Narrative and The Plot……............................................................20

3.2 Conceptual Framework…………..........................................................25

3.3 Technical Details…………………..……………………………………36

3.4 The Audience……………………………..……………………………..38

CHAPTER IV: CONCLUSION……………………………………………….……39

BIBLIOGRAPHY….……………………………………………………...….………43

APPENDIX………………………...…………………………………..…….……….45

A. FILM CREW………………………….……………………………..…….45

vii    
B. THE MAKING OF THE ANIMATOR’S HELL……….……………….47

C. BEHIND THE SCENES……..……………….…………...……..………48

viii    
 LIST OF FIGURES

1. Griffin, G. (1975). Head……….....……………………………………………..17

2. Animating. (2012). Animator’s Hell………………………………………......20

3. The character reads the script. (2012). Animator’s Hell….……………….....21

4. She damages the yellow character. (2012). Animator’s Hell……………......22

5. The character decides to sleep. (2012). Animator’s Hell…………………….23

6. She tries to put the character in an object form. (2012). Animator’s Hell.....24

7. The other table comes alive. (2012). Animator’s Hell…….……………….....24

8. The metamorphosis of the character. (2012). Animator’s Hell…………...…27

9. She continues animating. (2012). Animator’s Hell…………...……....…...….29

10. The character checks the animator. (2012). Animator’s Hell……….…...…30

11. It says “you’re not good enough.” (2012). Animator’s Hell….………...….30

12. Animator startles. (2012). Animator’s Hell……………………………...…..30

13. It gets hurt as it touches the coffee mug. (2012). Animator’s Hell…....…...31

14. It says “I’m here.” (2012). Animator’s Hell………………………………….31

15. She feels ashamed. (2012). Animator’s Hell………...…………………...….32

16. The character sees her. (2012). Animator’s Hell………………………..…..32

17. She encounters with the character. (2012). Animator’s Hell………...……33

18. It checks the other table is an object or not. (2012). Animator’s Hell.........34

ix    
 CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

Pure objects in our living world have no movement and soul. Animation, on the

other hand, creates the illusion of life through the illusion of movement. In the

process of animating, the relationship between the animator and the material to

be animated is a relationship between a subject and an object. This subject –

object relationship lies at the core of this thesis. The thesis is inspired by French

Existentialist philosopher Jean-Paul Sartre’s philosophical concepts. Sartre

constructs his philosophy with the investigation of the core idea of being and

examines the relationship of man with the world. In this relationship, according

to Sartre, encountering with another man causes a problem. Sartre devotes a

whole chapter to this problem in his book Being and Nothingness (2003).

According to him each man has his own universe and has chance to change his

relationship with the world. This chance to choose makes man what he is. Man

takes decisions and each of these decisions has their own responsibility. With

1    
each choice man constructs himself and proves his existence to the other. The

Other for Sartre is hell. The encounter with another gives man shame and guilt as

he thinks that he is the subject of his own world but falls in an object form. When

Other sees the man he puts him in an object position in his own world. With his

consciousness he judges the man and reveals his weak points. This gives man the

feeling of shame. However from this encounter both become the object for each

other while they remain as subject for themselves. This recognition, according to

Sartre, is important because each of them prove their existence over the other.

The man is a subject as he puts the other in an object form. Being for other

necessitates being an object for the other. They recognize each other with

certainty of being subjects and they put each other in object form.

This thesis explores this subject – object relationship through a self-made clay

animation entitled Animator’s Hell. The animation takes Sartre’s statement “the

Other is Hell” as its starting point. Playing with the subject and object concepts,

the animation depicts a relationship between two parties, the animator and a

piece of clay, which changes according to subject-object relationship. It uses the

potentials of animation techniques (i.e. metamorphism and anthropomorphism

etc.) to explore Sartre’s ideas.

The animation unfolds as follows: The animator comes into a studio where there

are clays, shaping tools and dyes. She brings her script and a modeled character

to shoot her animation. She tidies up the table where she is going to shoot her

animation and takes a piece of clay and models the last component of her film,

which is a table. So the table is defined as object for her animation. The animator,

2    
on the other hand, stands as subject. The animator is alone in the studio

environment and sure that no one can judge her, as there are only objects.

However the table comes into life and becomes a hell for the animator. It starts

judging her through its actions without being noticed and reveals her weak

points; what the animator does not want to confess herself. Each time the

animator leaves the room or stops animating and turns her back, the table

becomes alive and plays a hide and seek game with the animator. The animator

increasingly feels bored, disappointment and frustrated. Towards the end of the

film the animator acts like no one is there: she takes off her t-shirt as no one can

judge her. At this point the clay character notices the animator and with its look

the animator feels ashamed. The animator becomes an object of other’s world.

This is the most direct reference to Sartre who gives a similar example to explain

the Other’s being hell for the man. In Animator’s Hell the encounter of the

animator and the character concludes with peaceful recognition after a short

struggle.

Animator’s Hell is significant as it attempts to fit Sartre’s statement “ the Other is

Hell” into an animation. Since animation, as a technique, makes it easier to reflect

abstract notions with the help of its vocabulary like metamorphism and

anthropomorphism, Sartre’s concept of subject - object relations are explored in

this film. The relationship between the animator and the piece of clay is another

kind of subject-object relationship. This project can be seen as an attempt to

establish a parallelism between subject - object relations formulated in two

different disciplines, one is philosophical and the other is artistic. The project also

differs itself from its ancestors as this time the character is in control. The

3    
authority of the animator and the portrayal of her role as God are destroyed. The

hierarchical relationship between the created character and the animator is no

longer supported in this film. The animator and the character become even as

both have the attributions that Sartre explained as the nature of human being.

However film has a classical narration and references to the Sartre. It does not

consist of descriptive manner to explain Sartre’s philosophy, as it is only the

inspiration for Animator’s Hell.

Chapter Two starts with a literature review. In the first place Jean Paul Sartre’s

existential philosophy is considered. This is followed by a close examination of

Sartre’s concept of the Other. The example he gives about the confrontation with

the Other and the feel of shame is explained in detail. Some animation theories,

which are considered significant within the framework of the thesis, are also

included in this chapter. The works of well-known theorists like Paul Wells

(Understanding Animation, 1998 and Scriptwriting, 2007), Ulo Pikkov (Animasophy,

2010) and Maureen Furniss (Art in Motion: Animation Aesthetics, 1998) are

examined. The chapter concludes with a discussion of the differences between

animation and live action in order to justify the choice of animation as a

technique in this project. It also overviews animation examples like La Linea

(Canadoli, 1971) and Head (Griffin, 1975) as they have been inspiring for

Animator’s Hell.

Chapter Three focuses exclusively on the project, Animator’s Hell. First the formal

description of the project is given where the characters and the story from

beginning to the end is described. Then it moves to conceptual description of the

4    
project, where the film is examined scene by scene by referring to philosophical

points discussed in Chapter Two. Integrating Sartre’s philosophy in the

Animator’s Hell is clearer in this part. Technical description part gives information

about the production and post-production processes. The shooting process and

the tools that are used during the process are described in detail. Also, the post-

production part and the music composition are explained. The chapter concludes

with the goals and expectations of the project regarding the audience as well as

the exhibition format and context of the project.

The final chapter is reserved for conclusion where the significance and the

purpose of the project are emphasized. The overall project is summed up in this

chapter. The references to philosophical points are underlined once again.

5    
 CHAPTER II

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Sartre’s Existential Philosophy and His Concept of the Other

Jean Paul Sartre’s existential philosophy starts with the investigation of being. In

the first place Sartre claims that existence precedes essence. What differs man

from stone’s existence is his ability to act and carry himself to the future

(Kaufman, 1989: 294). According to Sartre primary philosophers and especially

Descartes was wrong in their deductions. Descartes statement “I think therefore,

I am” has to be changed into “I act therefore, I am.” After the man’s being exist,

the important point for him is to act and change his given world. Life is always

like a project in which man tries to fulfill his being. In order to accomplish this

goal man invents targets for himself. By this way he carries himself to another

state but he is never satisfied with the position he comes in. For this reason he

keeps inventing new targets. Sartre indicates that man is nothing but what he

purposes, he is the sum of his actions, nothing more (Kaufman, 1989: 299).

6    
Although he can direct his life as he wants because he is a free being, one can

raise the argument that there are certain things that he cannot change or

interfere. It would be absurd to think about the consciousness, which is a very

important component of existence, apart from the given world. Since for Sartre,

consciousness is always the consciousness of something, the subject needs the

given world or the object for its own existence. Sartre claims that the things that

we cannot change as a whole is the given world. There is the world that we

cannot interfere. We cannot control a stone falling from a mountain and it’s

closing the road. However this is not the important point, because what matters

is man’s relationship with the situation and the position, the man would take

against it (Capleston, 1975: 376). So it is the choice that makes the man who he is.

It is true that he cannot change the given world but by changing the attitude

towards the given, he can change its own life and world. In the given example

above, man can either find another path because the road is closed by a stone

fallen from the mountain or he can just sit there and wait someone to open the

road. His choice is what makes him what he is.

In each and every step man makes decisions for his life with his freedom. As

long as there is freedom there is also responsibility. Man is responsible for his

every act. Existentialism, in the first place, puts man in possession of himself as

he is, and then it places on him the responsibility of his existence (Kaufman,

1989: 290). Man is the subject and it cannot go beyond its subjectivity. The

despair that he feels comes from this responsibility. Sartre calls the situations that

man does not take responsibility for “bad faith.” Taking the responsibility is a

great pressure for man and he sometimes tries to escape from making choices on

7    
his own and assuming responsibility for his acts and existence. Without nestling

to bad faith, man has to accept his existence and responsibility (Bompiani,

Naville, Picon, 2007: 64-65).

As man proves his existence and subjectivity to himself, Sartre moves to the

discussion of existence of the Other. What differ man from an object are the

ability to act and have freedom. Man’s subjectness is found in his acting and

consciously choosing himself and also taking the responsibility of his existence.

Until Sartre, all kinds of materialism had treated man as a mere object that has

pre-determined reactions, indifferent from a table (Kaufman, 1989: 312).

However, Sartre indicates that when man is aware of his subjectivity, he is also

aware of the existence of others too. Man attains himself in the presence of the

other; that is he gets the certainty of himself from the certainty of existence of the

other (Kaufman, 1989: 313).

In order to make this issue clearer and investigate it deeply, Sartre gives an

example: A man in a corridor is sure that there is nobody in there except himself.

He decides to look into a room from a keyhole. As he starts looking he sees

people talking or doing something in the room. At this point, the man looking

from a keyhole, is sure that the people inside of the room do not see him and the

man freely and comfortably watches them. Suddenly he hears some footsteps in

the corridor. The idea that probably another man is watching the man makes him

feel ashamed. The Other that stands in the corridor is the mediator between the

man and himself. The man realizes that he actually feels the shame with the

existence of the Other. When he confronts with the Other he turns back to himself

8    
and realizes his own state (Sartre, 2003: 245). So, in order to be a subject he needs

another one to turn back to himself. As Sartre (2003: 246) underlines, “I recognize

that I am as the Other sees me.” At the beginning of the example, when the man

spies on the other people from the keyhole they are mere objects for him because

they are not aware of being watched and the man does not turn himself from

them. The man is alone in his actions in his own world (Sartre, 2003: 283). The

consciousness stays unreflective. But when he realizes that he is perceived by an

Other, he is aware of the state that he is in; he gets how he is looked like in the

Other’s eyes. The Other is not only what I see but he is also the one who sees me

(Sartre, 2003: 252). In other words he notices his own weakness, as they are

revealed to another.

The other’s existence reveals itself with his actions, gestures and expressions. The

relationship between the man and the Other is not given but it is constituted

gradually and, in doing so, the man puts the Other in an object form (Sartre, 2003:

252). As it is noted before, consciousness is always the consciousness of

something and it depends on the object outside of himself. For this reason, the

subject (the man) perceives the Other as a concrete and knowable object since it is

the consciousness of the Other. This is a reciprocal situation as the Other gets his

subjectivity via the man. “Being-seen-by-the-other” necessitates the truth of

“seeing-the-Other” (Sartre, 2003: 281). So the man’s subjectivity is denied by the

Other and he becomes an object of the Other. For this reason, although the man

perceives himself as subject via the Other, he is also the object for him. Sartre

explains the reason why the Other appears as object as follows in his Being and

Nothingness (2003: 255): “[…] since the Other can not act on my being by means

9    
of his being, the only way that he can reveal himself to me is by appearing as an

object to my knowledge.”

What happens to a man belongs to him. Since the experience of being perceived

by the Other its his own experience, the Other also belongs to him as an object.

The shape and the type of the Other is not important, the relationship that the

man has with the Other is not important either, but the pure existence of the

Other and man’s encounter with him is the recognition of existence for both

sides. So, the man’s existence and being a nature rises from the pure existence of

the Other (Sartre, 2003: 286).

Later in Being and Nothingness (2003: 294), Sartre starts examining the Other’s

nature and his existence.

I cannot be an object for myself, for I am what I am; thrown back on its
own resources, the reflective effort toward a dissociation results in failure;
I am always reapprehended by myself. And when I naively assume that it
is possible for me to be an objective being without being responsible for it,
I thereby implicitly suppose the Other’s existence; for how could I be an
object if not for a subject. Thus for me the Other is first the being for
whom I am an object; that is, the being through whom I gain my
objectness. If I am to be able to conceive of even one of my properties in
the objective mode, then the Other is already given. He is given not as a
being of my universe but as a pure subject.

Thus when the man encounters with another he suddenly becomes conscious

that he is the object. In order to be an object - that is certain about his being

subject as he apprehends himself over and over again - the Other has to be a

subject. Because as noted before, subject and object depends on each other, in

order for the Other’s being subject the man has to be an object. There is no

circumstance that an object is an object for another object (Sartre, 2003: 313). It

10    
can only be the object of a subject. This encounter is also the proof of their

existence at that present time for both sides. The Other is present as long as the

man exists there for-others. Moreover the man was only the subject before the

Other comes, but with his existence the man becomes both a subject and an

object. For this reason it can be said that the Other is necessary for man’s

understanding of himself comprehensively. Once the man gets conscious that he

is the object, he also becomes an other for the Other: “It is the fact that my denial

that I am the Other is not sufficient to make the Other exist, but the Other must

simultaneously with my own negation deny that he is me. It is the facticity of

being-for-others” (Sartre, 2003: 324).

The very characteristic that differs Other from a mere object is his having

freedom, responsibility and consciousness. Spinoza indicates that thought can be

limited only by another thought. Affected by Spinoza, Sartre (2003: 310) indicates

that consciousness can be limited only by another consciousness. The Other

reveals himself first with his actions and his burdening look. The man is

ashamed because he assumes that he is going to be judged by him, since the

Other has consciousness. Because of this being judged by another and becoming

an object while he was just a subject, “the Other is Hell” according to Sartre. The

man cannot escape from feeling disturbed. However, as it can be apprehended

from Sartre’s philosophy, this encounter with the Other does not lead man to a

negative situation. As he is perceived by another he proves his own existence

and gets what he is in reality. So, as this encounter leads both of them to be

recognized by each other, it is necessary. The man has to accept Other’s existence

in order for his own existence.

11    
Sartre has also written a play based on “the other is hell” argument: No Exit

(1989) is written in 1944, one year after Being and Nothingness. The play starts

with a man (Garcin) accompanied by a velvet getting into a hotel room. Two

women (Inez and Estelle) also enter the same room. Both the man and the

women are actually dead. While they think that they are supposed to go to hell,

they find themselves stucked in a hotel room. As the conversation goes on they

realize that they are actually in hell because each one becomes hell to another.

These three characters have nothing in common and they have not even seen

each other while they were living. One by one they start telling their own stories.

As each one reveals his/her secrets, the others judge and express his/her weak

points. The one who tells the story gets ashamed and angry, as he/she hears the

facts that he/she does not want to accept. At some point, Estelle and Garcin

become a group and act as if Inez is not there. They deny the existence of Inez,

which gives a big anger to her, as they do not recognize her. They let Inez to get

into her own nothingness. These points are very crucial as Sartre underlines the

other’s being hell. First, the weak points of oneself are spelled out by others,

which indicates that the others have the consciousness that one has the ability to

judge. Second, they start acting in a way that irritates the other. They deny the

existence of the other and let her lost in her nothingness. At the end of the play

three characters realize that there is no exit from this hell. Although there are no

torments as they have expected, they become torments for themselves. They

accept each other as the way they are and try not to speak with each other as

much as possible.

12    
2.2 An Overview of the Critical Literature on Animation

While, to some, animation seems like a naïve and primitive form of cinema, it

actually has its own language and vocabulary that distinguish it from live action.

It shares some aspects with live action such as frame, composition, structure,

shots and camera movements (Wells, 2007: 21). However, it also has its own

distinctive vocabulary. Paul Wells (2007) explains some of these vocabularies in

detail in his book Scriptwriting. For instance “metamorphosis” is the change of

one form to another. The imposition of human characteristics to an animal or an

object, “anthropomorphism” is also an important aspect of animation. Another

aspect is “symbolic association” that is the use of abstract visual signs and

attribution of meanings to them. “Sound illusion” is another important

ingredient in animation. It changes the silent ambience of animation by using

voice and soundtracks, which also increases the audience’s attention at particular

points and controls the vision (Wells, 2007: 21). Sound effects in animation are

faster than visual effects.

The distinctive characteristics or vocabularies listed above are the most

important ones draw me towards animation technique. My film Animator’s Hell

uses these components. The clay table goes through “metamorphosis” and turns

into a human-shaped being. Later as it acts like a man it becomes an

“anthropomorphic” character. The animation was shot silent, as the

photographing technique and the frame-by-frame movement is used. The voice

13    
of the character and sound effects were added later. With sound, the character

turned out to be more humanized. It can talk and react verbally to certain

circumstances. The voice and sound effects gave the animation a warmer

atmosphere and made it more realistic.

Another distinction between animation and live action is while in live action

audience sees still images; in animation there are time jumps. The flux of time in

animation takes leaps of varying length, in live action; however, it flows evenly

(Pikkov, 2010: 49). Maureen Furniss (1998: 5) gives a concise summary of the

difference between animation and live action in Art in Motion: Animation

Aesthetics:

One way to think about animation is in relation to live action media. The
use of inanimate objects and certain frame by frame filming techniques
suggest ‘animation’ whereas the appearance of live objects and continuous
filming suggest ‘live action’.

Animator’s Hell also draws attention to this difference by combining live action

and frame-by-frame animation. These two different techniques give the

impression that there are two different worlds. Due to the structure of the script

these two different worlds are interlaced. Some items that are used in live action

scenes like the yellow-modeled character, the script and the coffee mug also exist

in the animated scenes. The movements of these items continuously flow in live

action parts whereas their movements in animated parts are constructed through

leaps.

Animation is often considered as a genre of cinema and it is often represented as

children’s entertainment. However, it is a distinct form that is able to present

14    
ideas, thoughts and abstractions not only to children but also to the elder

audience (Wells, 2007: 61). Especially experimental animations use lots of

abstractions and their target audience are not children but the elder ones. Paul

Wells (1998: 45), in Understanding Animation, notes that “It is often the case that

experimental animation is closely related to philosophical and spiritual concerns,

and seeks to represent inarticulable personal feelings beyond the orthodoxies of

language.”

With its own language, animation brings various possibilities to filmmakers that

go beyond mere entertainment. It cannot be denied that slapstick animation

amuses people, but it still “possesses the ability to absolutely resist notions of the

real world” (Wells, 1998: 6), as well as dealing with “serious” themes like

political issues, sexual identities or survival instincts (Wells, 1998: 140).

The creator role is dominant in animation. Movements of the characters and all

other characteristics both for the setting and the scenario come from animator’s

hands. For this reason, the relationship between the animator and the characters

in an animated film is similar to the relationship between the God and his

creatures. There are several examples of animations in which the animator stands

in the creator role and the character he/she creates gets into a dialogue with its

creator. One well-known example is La Linea created by the Italian cartoonist

Osvaldo Cavandoli. It was broadcasted between 1971 and 1986 and consisted of

90 episodes, each lasting 2 or 3 minutes. Cavandoli uses simple line drawing. A

simple male character is drawn. As the character becomes alive and starts

walking, the animator, represented only by a photographic hand, creates certain

15    
obstacles or new situations for him, such as drawing a hole or a woman, which

will somehow cause trouble. The character falls into the hole or falls in love with

the woman and tries to impress her, but it needs the animator (his creator) to

rescue it from the hole or help it to impress the woman. It fights with the

animator and the animator draws what the character wants. La Linea is a very

aggressive and Italian character that argues a lot with its creator. The animator

stays in the creator or God position and controls both the scene and the character.

Cavandoli creates slapstick comedies and with each obstacle he creates, he

amuses the audience by La Linea’s reflections. The character always demands

something from its “God”, the animator, and has little effect to control his story.

Another example, which is similar to the theme of Animator’s Hell, is the

American animator George Griffin’s 1975 experimental animation Head. Griffin

investigates his drawn character’s simplicity and believes that one should be

naïve at all times like his characters. Correlatively he tells that his face is

changing, as he gets older and this indicates that he is loosing his naivety. He

acts in the video and tells the story of his face and his characters. Then in stop

motion format he starts drawing the characters onto the papers in his studio. The

characters that he creates give the same speech as Griffin has done as if they are

Griffin and he is still naive. There is no solid storyline in the film but the shots

are similar to the ones in Animator’s Hell. Like Head, Animator’s Hell combines live

action and stop motion animations and sets in a studio.

16    
 Figure 1. Griffin, G. 1975. Head.

The process of animation necessitates more labor than live action. Nothing is left

to chance. After the story comes out, the writer’s work is not finished. Some

scenes would not be as it is written, and for this reason animators create a very

detailed storyboard. Writer has to interfere while the animators are

storyboarding. All the settings are prepared as well as characters. While in live

action the important part is the post-production, in animation the situation is

reverse. Animators and all the crew have to finish most of the job in pre-

production period (Wells, 2007: 56). Each movement and scene have to be

calculated carefully and prepared in detail. Storyboard is the most crucial part of

the animation for this reason. In order to have more solid and fluid movements,

animators cannot divide scenes. It is hard to control movement if the animator

17    
divides the shot and make changes or fix the broken parts. As he works frame by

frame he can loose the continuity. For this reason, in animation, the animator has

to finish the job before starting to shoot.

The world animation creates is another important point. The illusionary world

that the animator creates is a copy of a real world and for this reason it is easily

comprehensible. On the other hand, everything is possible in this imaginary

world. The character can die hundred times but can be still alive. When a bad

thing occurs the character does not feel too much pain (Porter & Susman, 2000:

26). The scene can be changed in a second. The amusement lies in these points.

Audiences confront with the possibilities that they cannot have in the real world.

The imagination is also another point that makes animation fascinating. Colors,

objects and the characters are different and impossible to be but they still feed

from real world. Ulo Pikkov (2010: 102), animation theorist, writes:

When talking about realism in animated films, I primarily mean the

creation of the illusion of the real world. On a philosophical level, one
could, of course, argue that we see real puppets, actually existing
drawings or some other kind of substance in animations, and that’s what
creates the bridge between the spectators & reality.

The quotation above from Pikkov’s Animasophy discusses another layer of

animation’s reality. Animation comes to being from real world items and it exists

in the real world. In stop motion clay animations, this notion is more observable.

In Animator’s Hell there is also another existentialist layer of clay’s being there.

They exist and are given to the world of animator. The studio environment and

the live action videos underline the fact that it is a set in real world and when the

character becomes alive it sustains this notion. Moreover, animation characters

take their origins from the living human beings. Inanimate objects that have no

18    
soul or no consciousness become living forms in the hands of animators. They

are often shaped like human being but more importantly they act like man and

they have intelligence as human does. Characters are humanized (Porter &

Susman, 2000: 26). For these reasons the audience does not get the impression

that the animation is actually not real. Audience gets into the animation as the

live action audience gets into film without interrogating its reality.

19    
 CHAPTER III

THE PROJECT: ANIMATOR’S HELL

3.1 The Narrative and The Plot

The film starts with the animator coming into a room that is a studio to shoot

animation. She is prepared to shoot and holds a character she made before,

which is yellow and has human attributes, and the printed script of her film. She

tidies the set and models the last component of the film, which is a table. She

starts shooting her animation in stop motion format.

Figure 2. Animating. (2012). Animator’s Hell

20    
After a while, the animator gets bored and stops to deal with her script. After

having some corrections on the script, she lefts the studio. The table that she has

created turns into a living being, it gets up and checks itself. It looks around and

controls whether the other yellow character is alive or not. It sees that the yellow

character is a pure object that has no movement or soul. It plays with the items

that are designed for animation and finally gets to the script. It reads the script

and then writes what it thinks about it, which is “conflict” (Figure 3).

Figure 3. The character reads the script. (2012). Animator’s Hell

As it hears the sound of the animator getting into the studio again, the character

immediately gets the shape of table and stands in the position that it was before.

The animator sees the writing on the script and gets confused. Yet she goes back

to animating her film. After a while she turns to the script and starts changing

the scenario as it lacks “conflict.” Meanwhile the character again turns into its

man-shape and hides in the set. It makes sure that the animator is working and is

fully concentrated on her job. It says, “You’re not good enough.” When the

animator hears that whisper she startles and looks back. She checks whether

21    
someone is there. She gets frightened and takes a break. At the same time the

character turns into its prior position and form without being noticed. Animator

takes a coffee and starts her animation again. With the increasing boredom and

feeling of failure, she gets angry and destroys the yellow character she has

modeled for her animation (Figure 4).

Figure 4. She damages the yellow character. (2012). Animator’s Hell

She gives up her animation. The character rises again and touches the coffee

mug. It gets hurt but still continues what it wants to do. It hides again and this

time says, “I’m here.” The animator turns back quickly and this time she notices

that the table is not there. While she searches for the table around, the character

immediately goes to the set and takes to the table form. When the animator looks

at the set again she sees the table and thinks that she is too tired not to see the

table in its place. She gets out. The character relieves and with the fatigue it feels,

it decides to sleep (Figure 5).

22    
 Figure 5. The character decides to sleep. (2012). Animator’s Hell

When the animator comes into the studio the day after, she gets hot and takes

her t-shirt off as if nobody is there and she is alone in the studio. The character

stretches its body to wake up and sees the animator half naked. It laughs at her,

which causes the animator to panic. She immediately puts her t-shirt. She walks

towards the character. The animator looks surprised with what she sees. She tries

to understand what it is. At the same time the character is afraid and runs away.

The animator catches it and struggles with the character to turn it into the table

form (Figure 6). The character resists the animator and escapes from the

animator’s hands.

23    
 Figure 6. She tries to put the character in an object form.
(2012). Animator’s Hell

The animator decides to model another table for her animation as the character

resists being a table again. She recognizes the character as it is. When the

animator models another table and puts it into the set, the character approves her

act and checks the table whether it is really an object. Both gets secure this time

the table is an object. The animator lefts the studio. The character turns back to its

sleep and the table that is created afterwards, gets alive too at the end of the film

(Figure 7).

Figure 7. The other table comes alive. (2012). Animator’s Hell

24    
The film consists of both live action videos and stop motion animations. The

animator’s scenes are in live action format whereas the character’s scenes and

animator’s animating scenes are in stop motion format. The film raises its climax

with repetitions and the conflict is solved with the animator’s acceptance of the

character. At the end of the film another supposed-to-be-a-table-formed-object

becomes alive which indicates a repeating circle.

3.2 Conceptual Framework

The idea for this animation occurred to me after reading Sartre’s works. The

main inspiration was his idea of “the Other is Hell.” Moreover the theoretical

writings on animation and the technical specificity of animation made me decide

on putting live action videos and the stop motion animation together. The

process that I lived through this project was also important for shaping the film.

First of all, the film starts with the animator’s coming into the studio with a

modeled character and a script. The script is a very important substance for the

animation as it is noted in Chapter Two. Although it seems like once there is the

script the only thing left is to animate it, the film shows that this is not the case.

The animator correlatively improves the scenario and the film. The animator in

the film is not a successful one. She starts her animation without preparing

enough. Her script is not fully developed and she does not have a storyboard. As

the film goes she feels her failure and because of that she gets bored and stops

animating most of the time.

25    
The yellow clay character that she brings to the studio, has some features that

man does but it is not man shaped. Instead it is in a special form that neither

resembles a human nor an animal nor an object. So the audience confronts with a

modeled character that is itself an object. As the animator puts the table and the

character together in the set, she gives the definitions for her animation. It is

thought that the yellow character, as it has eyes and mouth and arms, is going to

be a subject (i.e., comes to life and is reflected to the audience as a living being),

the table, on the other hand, is defined as a pure object (i.e., it does not have will,

soul, or consciousness). The reason that I have chosen a table as an object form

lies in the related philosophical readings. Sartre often gives the example of a

table when he talks about the object form. Other texts on Sartre also give the

same example. The table is not used symbolically neither in the film nor in

Sartre’s philosophy. It is rather a particular, an example to indicate a form.

The animator starts animating and the hands of the animator intervenes into the

scene. If there were no hands, the audience would get the inspiration that the

yellow character is indeed a living being while the table is just a table. They

would think that it is a finished animation, they are going to watch, and it would

be confusing as there are other animation parts where the character becomes

alive. In order not to give this idea and snatch the audience from those scenes,

hands were necessary. So the audience understands that it is going to be an

animation but right now it is not so, because there is a process going on. The

audience is invited into the process of animation. Although both of the models

26    
are just objects, one of them (the yellow one) seems to be a subject that can move

and talk.

Figure 8. The metamorphosis of the character. (2012). Animator’s Hell

The scene in which the animator stops animating and starts working on the

scenario indicates that there is something in the scenario and the film that she

does not feel content with. This was actually a problem that I came across at the

beginning of the project. I realized that something was wrong with the script but

I was unable to fix it. The missing component of my film was the “conflict.” I

knew that it was missing but could not do something about that. However in one

of the discussions of my film one of the examining committee members told me

that my film lacked “conflict.” At that point the committee member “became

hell” for me since he told me what I was unwilling to confess to myself. As I

directly experienced the hell that Sartre indicates, I decided to include this

experience into my film. So the story in the film reflects my personal experience

too.

27    
As the animator goes out of the frame the table that she indicated as pure object

has metamorphosis, comes to life and turns out to be a character (Figure 8). At

this point, Sartre’s Other concept is indicated. The animator thinks that she is

alone in that studio and does what she wants to do. So she does not feel shame or

boredom, as she was sure that there was no one to judge her with his/her eyes.

The Other was in the object state and waited until she goes out. The character

first checks if the yellow character is also alive or not. The yellow character

remains as an object. Both the character and the audience are sure about its

objectness after the character’s check. The character acts, is conscious and has

will, which are the distinctive characteristics that Sartre attributes to human

being.

The character goes around makes funny acts and finally comes to the script. As it

writes “conflict” on the paper, it gives a clue of its existence to the animator. On

the other hand “conflict” can refer to Sartre again. Being a subject and having to

turn to the object position seems like a conflict in the first place. When Sartre

talks about the confrontation with the Other, he mentions about a conflict

between the two men. If we return to the film, with this act the character

criticizes the animator’s work and finds the missing part of the scenario and also

the weak point of the animator. As it turns to the table form, it shows that it does

not want to show itself to the animator at that moment. It remains as an object,

which gives the audience the opportunity to watch a play with the animator. The

animator sees the writing on the script and does not understand who wrote it.

She gets irritated because it is the first premise of her being watched and

criticized by another.

28    
 Figure 9. She continues animating. (2012). Animator’s Hell

As she continues working on the animation she has confusion in her mind, so she

does not work for a long time on the animation. She turns to the script and tries

to create a “conflict” in her scenario. The character turns to its normal shape

again and hides. The words that it spells “you’re not good enough” are the

comment that the animator is aware of but does not want to confess to herself

(Figure 11). She knows that she is not successful in this work and she hears these

words. In Sartre’s play No Exit (1989), there is also a conversation between two

characters similar to this one. The things that Garcin does in his life are criticized

by the other character Inez, and she implies his weak point. This causes Garcin to

feel anger and shame. The character does the same to the animator. In the first

place the animator searches someone like herself in the room. She gets frightened

to hear something from nothing (Figure 12). She gives a break. The pressure that

the character causes during the film increases the animator’s feeling of shame

and being failed.

29    
 Figure 10. The character checks the animator. (2012). Animator’s Hell

Figure 11. It says “you’re not good enough.” Figure 12. Animator startles. (2012).
(2012). Animator’s Hell Animator’s Hell

In the third phase of the film the fever of the animator gets high because of her

weird experiences. She gets angry, reacts with anger and she distorts the

character she has created. I associate this feeling from the beginning with

Roquentin’s feel of nausea in Sartre’s book La Nousee (2010). Roquentin’s

boredom and disappointment with himself increases as he feels the burden of his

existence (Sartre). The animator’s feeling increases in a similar way. Meanwhile

the character rises and gets hurt as it touches to hot coffee mug. The animation

theorist Paul Wells (2007: 93) indicates that, animated character should not be

sympathetic but it has to be emphatic to the audience. So with its actions and

30    
reactions, the character underlines the fact that it has senses as human do, and

his reactions are same with those of the human beings (Figure 13). That gives

audience a chance to empathize with the character.

Figure 13. It gets hurt as it touches the coffee mug. (2012).

Animator’s Hell

After the animator’s long search to find someone like herself and failure to do so,

the character draws her attention to its existence. This time it says “I’m here,”

which invites the animator into a play like hide and seek (Figure 14). As the

animator turns back she realizes that the table is not there. This is the first scene

that the character is so close to be caught. Precautiously it turns back to its prior

Figure 14. It says “I’m here.” (2012). Animator’s Hell

31    
position and shape. The animator thinks that she is too tired and therefore leaves

the studio.

The character relieves and starts sleeping. It forgets to turn into its prior position.

When the animator comes into the room there is no table but something like a

human sleeping. First the animator sweats and takes her clothes off as she thinks

that she is alone and can do whatever she wants as long as there is no one to

judge her. However when the character wakes up and sees the animator it laughs

loudly (Figure 16). The animator hears the laugh and panics (Figure 15). She tries

to wear her clothes again. She sees the human shaped character and becomes the

object of the world of the character. The character laughs at her, which is the

indication of her being judged by another. They confront and the animator

understands that all the little tricks were caused by this being. The object that she

thinks turn into a subject and it becomes hell for her. This situation is mutual.

The animator is also hell for the character as she puts it into an object form and

does not recognize it. So both the animator and the character are hell for each

other.

Figure 15. She feels ashamed. Figure 16. The character sees her.
(2012). Animator’s Hell (2012). Animator’s Hell

32    
 Figure 17. She encounters the character. (2012). Animator’s Hell

The animator does not want to accept its subjectivity and tries to put it into table

form again. The character resists to her and insists on its own subjectivity to be

recognized by the animator. Sartre, at this point, indicates that being has to

recognize the other’s existence, as this is also the indication of its own existence.

So the animator gives up and recognizes the character’s subjectivity and forms

another object for her animation to be continued. The character checks the

objectivity of the other table in the same way as it does before with the yellow

character. The animator and the character become a group and are sure about the

objectivity of the other table (Figure 18). However they both get wrong as when

the animator gets out and the character falls into sleep. The object they attain this

time becomes a subject too. So this is a circle that goes on.

33    
 Figure 18. It checks the other table is an object or not.
(2012). Animator’s Hell

This animation also investigates the relationship between the animator and her

creature. While in the primary examples the animator keeps his/her God-like

position and has full control over the animation and the character, in Animator’s

Hell, the animator seems to be God-like but she is not because the character is in

control and destroys her authority in the set. On the other hand, Sartre was an

atheist and he denied the existence of God. To assume that there is God in a

traditional way necessitates the occasion that it is a being that is always a subject.

As he is always the watching one, we are the objects for him. Moreover as we

never see him empirically he never takes an object form (Sartre, 2003: 313). If

there is God then the responsibility of man and his freewill has to be eliminated.

For this reason Sartre believes that God does not exist. In Animator’s Hell, the

animator cannot be a God because the character has its own will and acts freely

with the responsibility of its actions.

34    
The control in Animator’s Hell is in the character’s hands not in the animator’s.

The character is more conscious than the animator and it hints its existence as a

subject to the animator. The film gets its shape according to the character’s will.

The animator is always in the role of creator but she has no dominancy. Her

being a creator is destroyed as she looses her control over her set.

What the animator wants to indicate also fits to Sartre’s philosophy. As a normal

human being she tries to change what is given to her. The clays are just given

objects to her. She animates them and turns objects into illusionary subjects for

the audience. The animator’s effort is to prove her own existence to the audience.

On the other hand she makes a decision and animates the objects, takes the

responsibility of her own action. She is not satisfactory with her choice and the

responsibility of her choices gives her boredom.

As is indicated above, the film consists of my own experience and feeling of

burden. The process that the animator goes through in the film is almost the

same as my process during this project. For this reason, I decided to play the

animator in the videos. Thus as the creator of the project I am the animator at

two levels: First, I am the animator in the film (the diegetic animator) who looses

control over her film and encounters with her object turning into a subject.

Second, I am the non-diegetic animator who has determined everything in the

film, including what the diegetic animator was supposed to do. Therefore,

although the diegetic animator appears to loose control over her film, it is my

(non-diegetic animator) will and control that makes her appear so. My purpose

in the film was to express Sartre’s philosophy in a more concrete way: An object

35    
form (the table) turns into a subject form. It is almost impossible to give this

metamorphosis directly in live action. For this reason, I have chosen the

animation technique. The scenes in which the animator animates the character

alienates the audience by breaking the illusion. When the animator leaves and

the character begins to move on its own the audience returns to illusion again.

Thus the animation self-reflexively reflects upon the animation’s being a means

of creating illusion of life.

3.3 Technical Details

Animator’s Hell is a stop motion clay animation. It consists of live action videos

and frame-by-frame shots. The duration of the film is 7 minutes and 16 seconds.

All the shots have been taken in the animation studio, the Department of Graphic

Design of Bilkent University. The film has been shot in 3 weeks. The stop motion

parts are taken in Dragon Stop Motion 2.2 program and it is edited in Adobe

After Effects and Premiere Pro CS4 programs. During the shooting Canon 500D

with 18-55 lenses were used both for the stop motion and live action parts. The

stop motion part consists of approximately 5400 photos.

During the shooting of stop motion scenes it was hard to be both in the scene as

an actress and shoot it. Therefore a technical crew supported me. Zeynep Engin,

Begüm Bilgenoğlu and Hande Çilingir were on the desk to shoot the frames

while I was playing or getting involved into the scenes. They were also effective

36    
in lightening and recording the live action scenes. Continuity in stop motion

scenes was a major challenge. The Dragon Stop Motion program’s onionskin

feature enabled us to follow the frames. However since the tiniest movement on

the set has changed the entire, we had to re-shoot or cut some scenes and

sometimes change the camera angle. The battery of the camera was also

problematic because there was no apparatus to use the camera while it is

connected to the electricity. Although we changed the battery with the extra one

each time it dies, the camera angle and the zoom changed so we tried to finish

the scenes before battery dies.

As the film often involved metamorphosis it was impossible to use a wired

skeleton for the clay model. The clay was raw and in each metamorphosis it was

shaped spontaneously. Missing the inside skeleton made difficult the character

stand still. For this reason, many eyes and mouths were designed before, and

were used only once as they get distorted when the character falls apart.

The opening titles, the end credits and the character’s escape scene were shot in

green screen. For the first time in my animation journey I used green screen and

compositing. After shooting in green screen, I edited videos in Adobe After

Affects CS4. The whole animation was color corrected. Sorenson Video 3 codec

was used to compress the video. In this whole editing and rendering process my

instructor Orhan Iktu helped me.

The sound mix, dubbing and original music were produced by Gönenç Mutlu.

He dubbed in Garage Band’09 version 5.1 and the music was arranged in Logic

37    
Pro 9 and composed in Behringer UMX 490 keyboard. The inspiration for the

music came from Thomas Newman’s composition for Wall-E (2008). The rhythm

of the music follows the dramatic action.

3.4 The Audience

The film does not target a particular audience. In the first place, the expected

outcome from the audience is joy and laughter. The actions of the character are

funny to some extent. Therefore the young audience can watch the film

comfortably and laugh. Yet the film has a philosophical context. People who are

familiar with Sartre’s philosophy or at least who are inclined towards

philosophical thinking can grasp the ideas that the film exposes.

Animator’s Hell is presented to a jury composed of scholars and some

schoolmates in the FADA Art Gallery at Bilkent University, Ankara, Turkey. The

audience had the critical thinking ability. The reaction they gave was as

expected. They laughed at some scenes and enjoyed as well as getting the

subject-subject and subject-object relations in the film. After the jury, the film was

exhibited to other visitors in the form of a looped screening.

A DVD of the film consisting of the film itself, the bloopers, and set photographs

has also been prepared. Along with submission to short film festivals, the film

will be distributed to interested parties through DVDs.

38    
 CHAPTER IV

CONCLUSION

Since the beginning of the project I had in my mind was to do something that

covers Sartre’s existentialist philosophy. The literature review was in accordance

with this intention. After completing research on related philosophical texts and

animation theories, the idea of the film started to develop. Although the story

changed over time, the main focus stayed on Sartre’s Other concept, and the

subject (the animator) – object (the character) relationship. I attempted to meet

the philosophical concepts with the technical and theoretical side of animation.

As clays are already existing objects, as an animator, I choose to shape them and

create the illusion of movement and life for the audience. This was the point of

myself showing my existence and defining myself. As Sartre noted, in each phase

we put targets and accomplish them for our own existence. And in each

accomplishment we are never satisfied with the result. For this reason we put

39    
another target to accomplish. The animation project was my target and during its

implementation process I learned more about animation and the philosophical

side. The process was educational for me and it also gave me the opportunities to

try new paths like using green screen and place the animation character into the

living world. However the point I arrived at does not satisfy me enough. This

gives me the urge to do more things on animation related works and create new

targets.

Sartre’s Other becomes a hell first when he/she looks at man directly and puts

man into the object position. With the Other’s look, the man feels shame and he is

judged by the Other. Escaping from subjectivity and becoming an object irritates

the man. The Other is also in the form of object for the man. So both sides become

hell to each other. They judge each other and try to prove their subjectivity. In

animation, Animator’s Hell, the object formed puts the animator in the object form

and judges her. With its looks the animator becomes an object in the character’s

world. While she stays as a subject in her own world - as she cannot be the object

for herself - she moves to another world as an object. This gives her the feeling of

shame. She tries to be recognized as a subject for the character. For this reason

she struggles with it and tries to re-shape it as a table form.

Second, the Other becomes hell for the man as it starts judging the man and

showing his or her own consciousness. The Other spells the weak points of the

man. As a conscious being, this is the part where he/she proves his/her

existence, which is the same with the man’s existence. His/her subjectivity

changes from object to subject. In animation, too, the character secretly spells the

40    
weak points of the animator and these are the indications of its being a subject.

The object that the animator defines as a table starts proving its existence like the

animator does. Both are the hell for each other and from this confrontation they

accept their subjectivity in their own worlds peacefully. After this mutual

recognition they become a pair and model a new object, which is again a table.

The table, defined as object again becomes alive and indicates the repeating

circle.

Another different aspect of Animator’s Hell is its character being in control.

Primary examples of animation like La Linea, which consists animator and the

character dialogue, emphasize the authority of the animator. The animator can

change the set or intervene the appearance of the character. He is in the ‘God’

position in the animation and the character is less effective in its own story.

However in this project the character becomes even with the animator. In the

first half of the film the animator seems to be the controller over the animation

and the environment. She is not aware of what she created for her animation. As

the character becomes alive and makes little changes in the environment it

becomes trouble for the animator. She is no longer in the ‘God’ position. The

character she created creates the troubles for the animator while in other

examples animator creates the troubles for the character. The hierarchical

structure between the character and the animation is destroyed in this film. It is

also different from other examples as it covers some point of Sartre’s philosophy.

There are many examples that consists philosophical concepts. However

Animator’s Hell is maybe the first example of Sartre’s philosophical concept over

41    
subject- object relationship and also the Other is covered by a stop motion clay

animation.

As animation lets the animator experiment with forms and events that are almost

impossible in live action, already-existing clays act like living beings in the film.

The objects turn into subjects, which is possible in animation world. A research

by Paul Wells (1998: 98) indicates that male animators are more inclined towards

making classical animations and use character designs and narration styles that

is suggested by Disney. However, female animators indicated that they prefer

animation as a tool. Their works are considered experimental animations. For

them, animation provides opportunity to do what cannot be done in live action.

They define animation as a form and achieve critical and significant ends with

animation. I also empathize myself with this feminine look at animation. Besides

its being a passion and fun for me, animation is also very suitable to reflect

philosophical and abstract notions compared to any other filmic form.

Animator’s Hell evolved in the implementation process. The result was an

animation inspired by Sartre’s Other notion and also an experiment for me.

Whether the philosophical notions can be reflected with an animation was the

major at the origin of this project. The technical potentials of animation are as

effective as philosophical concept in this project. Thinking through two different

disciplines and combining them let Animator’s Hell come into life.

42    
 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Capleston, F. (1975). A History of Philosophy: Volume IX: Modern Philosophy: From

the French Revolution to Sartre, Camus, and Levi-Strauss. London: Burns,
Oates & Washbourne.

Furniss, Maureen. 1998. Art in Motion: Animation Aesthetics. John Libbey &
Company PTY.

Griffin, George. 1975. Head. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dgFoSsAPCs4

Jean Paul Sartre. 2011. Thomas Flynn (Ed.). Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Retrieved April 21, 2012. http://plato.stanford.edu/.

Kaufman, W. (ed.) 1989. “Existentialism is a Humanism” in Existentialism from

Dostoyevski to Sartre. Meridian Publishing Company.

La Linea. Internet Movie Data Base. Retrieved May 3, 2012.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0406432/

Porter, T. and Susman G. 2000. Creating Lifelike Characters in Pixar Movies.

Communications of the Ach. –43(1): 25-29.

Pikkov, Ulo. 2010. Animasophy: Theoretical Writings on the Animated Film. Estonian
Academy of Arts, Department of Animation.

Sartre, Jean Paul. 1989. No Exit and Three Other Plays. Vintage Publishing.

-----. 2003. Being and Nothingness. Routledge Classics.

43    
-----. 2010. Bulantı. Can Sanat Yayınları.

Wells, Paul. 2007. Scriptwriting. AVA Publishing.

-----. 1998. Understanding Animation. Routledge.

44    
 APPENDIX

A. FILM CREW

45    
46    
B. THE MAKING OF THE ANIMATOR’S HELL

47    
C. BEHIND THE SCENES

48    
49