[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 177 KB, 800x858, cunt.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
18357673 No.18357673 [Reply] [Original]

The Platonic ideal of a bin

>> No.18357678

>>18357673
binness

>> No.18357753

>>18357673
bin-in-itself

>> No.18357822

>>18357673
bin qua bin..........

>> No.18358012
File: 385 KB, 927x1390, Understanding-Comics_036.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
18358012

Is the Cartoon the embodiment of Platonic Idealism?

>> No.18358193

>>18358012
Yeah that was what I was going for.

>> No.18358201

binception

>> No.18358203

>>18358012
Understanding Comics is great. Shame McCloud has such shit sensibilities.

>> No.18358353

>>18358203
Shit sensibilities? You mean like his taste in art?

>> No.18358726
File: 86 KB, 969x844, _91408619_55df76d5-2245-41c1-8031-07a4da3f313f.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
18358726

>>18358012
>>18358193
>>18358203
Absolute state of /lit/ 2021

>> No.18358738

>>18358012
Why does his hair style changes when he becomes less cartoony?

>> No.18358781

>>18358012
This is nonsense. Does the author suffer from delusion? I don't see myself in that simple cartoon. I can see with my eyes what it is and understand it by thinking that it is a simple cartoon with no confusion of it being me.

>> No.18358944

>>18357673

That's not a bin, that's Diogenes' home

>> No.18358951
File: 20 KB, 280x400, Oscar-can2.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
18358951

>>18358944
BEHOLD: DIOGENES!

>> No.18358962

>>18358781

The idea of the comic is not wrong. The less detailed the character is, the easier it is to follow it because you're not distracted by any of the features. It's easier to "get absorbed" into the comic.

>> No.18358966

>>18358951

Nice one

>> No.18358980

>>18358962
McCloud later makes the point that protagonists are often drawn with simple features, while antagonists are always the most detailed characters in animated media.

>> No.18358996
File: 4 KB, 400x300, dots.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
18358996

>>18358962
The author specifically says that you see yourself, but I don't see myself because the cartoon isn't me, and I don't suffer from delusion. But according to you, these dots are the best characters for making the most "get absorbed into" comic ever since it has the least features.

>> No.18359011
File: 26 KB, 288x383, 33865595-288-k104494~2.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
18359011

>>18358996

>> No.18359099

>>18358962
>because you're not distracted by any of the features
>>18358996
I think I can elaborate, at least what I got from it.

He's making a common proposal that the less defining features to a cartoon character the harder it is to alienate your self from it because it narrows it down to the essential symbols. A lot of cartoons have distinct styles in their simplicity of conveying character through strokes, shapes, angles, composition and so on. It's filling in the gaps that brings you closer to the idea, or the thing, rather than trying to locate or decompose the complex image with regard to the thing itself.

>> No.18359208

>>18359099
You can be alienated by a lack of detail just as you can be alienated by lots of detail.

>> No.18359332
File: 48 KB, 590x350, wheelie-bins-422386.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
18359332

>>18357673
Empirical bins

>> No.18359361

>>18359208
You're more likely to be alienated by the latter than the former. Details inherently distance the object from the thing it conveys, at least in theory.
Even detailed drawings have to be anchored in a defining symbol or two, hence things like superheroes being so easily recognizable in their silhouettes or their logos. A handful of strokes is enough to recognize almost any memorable design from golden age cartoonists.

It's also why things can be viewed as garish sometimes while simplicity or subtlety are often viewed as tasteful. Adding to the thing obscures it, stripping it down complements it. And having the thing close to full view allows the person to navigate as close as possible to the unconscious symbol without directly pointing to the thing it holds, giving it a dreamlike quality.

This isn't to say that complexity is impossible to relate to or not crucial even to defining some qualities, but if I feel this is getting into TL;DR territory as is, I think you get my point.

>> No.18359380

>>18358738
Our self-image is mirrored. Because of mirrors

>> No.18359456

>>18359380
But the lightning bolt on his shirt is not mirrored

>> No.18359465
File: 185 KB, 770x513, Bay+Area+Dumpsters+-+Contact-768w.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
18359465

>>18357673
The historical materialist dumpsters

>> No.18359504
File: 22 KB, 538x800, big kek.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
18359504

>>18359465

>> No.18359508

>>18359456
Nobody's perfect

>> No.18359537

>>18358980
interesting though, i'd like to see if it's true or just a nice theory

>> No.18359810
File: 1.19 MB, 3024x4032, saussure.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
18359810

>>18357673
The semiological can