On The Philosophy Of Creation Developed By The Shanghai Animation Film Studio Community Of Animators

The present thesis puts into the spotlight, in a more objective manner, a spectrum of arts including film, fine arts, children’s literature and drama against the backdrop of the Shanghai cultural climate over the span of the period from the early 20 th century to the 1940 s in an effort to make sense of their implications for the development of early Chinese animation. This coincided with the fact that a good number of the artists subscribing to Shanghai Animation Film Studio grew up and started their practice in art creation alongside Shanghai culture as it evolved from the early 20 th century to the 1940 s.Given the above precondition, the author, taking artists subscribing to Shanghai Animation Film Studio as a community of creation in his research and analysis, observes from a relatively macro perspective activities of Shanghai Animation Film Studio in creation and production to highlight their philosophy of creation evolved and embedded in the process.To present their creation activities and relevant philosophy in a way easier to research and analyze, the author divides the SALS animators into three generation periods based on the entry of different artists into the community and their respective roles in history. In the meantime, the author also ventures to define the identity of the community and summarize its features in terms of creation. Drawing on identity classification of animators in other countries, the author proposes that the artists of the SALS community are what we call authorial animators.In the ensuing part, the author probes into the philosophies of creation pertinent to the three generation periods.In the first period(1947~1977),the creation philosophy of the Shanghai Animation Film studio animators as a community emerged as Sheng Teweimade it clear that due priority must be given to the“nationalization”of the animation films created and produced by Shanghai Animation Film Studio.Tewei did not stop at raising the point;he rather put it into his creation as much as he could.Given that the SALS community followed a more collective approach in creation and production as well as in professional development,Tewei’s philosophy of“nationalization”or“Chinese path”immediately became the creed shared by the entire community who followed it in all respects in practice.The first generation,who constituted the backbone of the SAFS creation team back then,collectively produced the hallmark production of Shanghai Animation Film Studio—Havoc in Heaven,or Uproar in Heaven(Da Nao Tian Gong,《大闹天宫》),which was representative of the state of the art of the SAFS community.In parallel,animators of the community endeavored to innovate and as such invented a number of new animation forms like cutout and watercolor as they learned hard from others and borrowed creatively from traditional Chinese culture,making possible the diversified progress in animation art with Chinese characteristics.Also,their accomplishment in theme and presentational technique showcased the depths of artistic attainment and cultivation of the first generation members.Given the political dominance in the Chinese society throughout that period where members of the community, who were “war-washed” in his/her earlier life, formed the philosophy of animation creation under the leadership of the Communist Party of China, their philosophy of creation self-evidently featured high political consciousness and conformity, leaving a clear fingerprint of politics and propaganda in their productions.On the other hand, with a ruling planned economy atop, creation was irrelevant to production cost and the market, which in effect led to the collective neglect of the community as far as the market mechanism was concerned. Coupled with the trauma incurred by the decade-long Cultural Revolution, it is almost highly predictable that the Shanghai Animation Film Studio as a community should feel at a loss and helpless when confronting the onslaught of American and Japanese animation films as China made headway in reform and opening up.The first generation of the community remained productive in their career and could command artistic creations for their own sake. More importantly, their full-fledged philosophy of creation naturally became the critical elements in that of the second and third generations who were still in their artistic formative years and were heavily influenced by their first-generation superiors.Summarily, the creation philosophy of the community in the first period featured a clear developmental direction, i.e. the Chinese roadmap, and a powerful leadership based on the collective approach and political dominance relevant to the planned economy.The second period runs from 1978 to 1988. The philosophy of creation upheld by the SAFS community can be outlined as follows: firstly, the collective identity based on political consciousness and conformity gave way to the expression of personality and diversity relevant to the Zeitgeist, an outstanding trait of the community as they pursued the Chinese path in animation art. Secondly, their creation philosophy responded to the more true-to-life humanity. Animation characters were no longer perfect and creation was not confined to stereotypes. Characters were alive with flaws in personality and morality where virtue and vice were present in the same character. The creators endeavored to narrate characters in a more realistic manner which was in conformity with the general development of cinematic creation and production in China.While in their heyday of artistic creation, artists at the Shanghai Animation Film Studio again found themselves stuck in the quagmire of market mechanism as in stark contrast to the previous planned system, not knowing where they were going or where to go. To survive, the animators as a community had to compromise—they launched short subject series, TV animation series and explored partnership for processed production—so as to grab a fair share of the market.As leaders of the first generation like Tewei and the Wan brothers withdrew from the community, the second generation took the baton and rose to leadership in administration as well as in creation. However, the 2nd leadership were somehow weaker in creation compared to their forerunners and therefore, coupled with a bewildering market economy, the animators of Shanghai Animation Film Studio as a community suffered a gradual eclipse.Throughout the second period, the community formed in their creation a guiding philosophy of “one path, many possibilities” which indicated a turn from the previous creed—nationalization of animation with diversification, more relevant to the historical contexts, more freedom and flexibility for individual animators’ personal fingerprint in their creations as in contrast to the previous collective footprint; artistic animation shorts, animated feature films and short subject TV series coexisted and contended as market economy came into play.The 3rd period, from 1988-1999, in effect remained a shadow community in a manner of speaking as its fist generation, who were old in age, disappeared from public attention as animators, and the second generation relinquished their leadership, and the majority of the so-called third generation, either for financial reasons or other, left the Studio, leaving a scanty of a handful artists struggling there still. By now, Shanghai Animation Film Studio as a community virtually came to an end in terms of its philosophy of creation. After various reforms in the creation of animation films in the 1980 s, the philosophy of the creators accordingly turned from reform in creation to reform in production following market operation, from thinking and reflection imposed by the authorial creators themselves to learning from outside China and to market-driven creators. Throughout this particular period, the philosophy of creation scattered in the individual members of the shadow community seemed rather distant from “nationalization” advocated and upheld by Tewei; to make it worse, from what it appeared their philosophy somewhat ran counter to Tewei’s. Deep down, however, that philosophy was something that the third generation experimented in finding “the Chinese path” in the international context and discourse, trying to answer the fundamental question of “who am I” as they pressed ahead. Yet, given the big picture of the societal background during that period of time as well as the average age of the animators subscribing to the shadow community, the third generation had to for the time being gave up their exploration of nationalization in animation art.Following the review of historical data and detailed analysis of the creation philosophies pertinent to the three periods in history, the author comes to see more clearly the cause-and-effect and development of the creation philosophy established by the SFAS community. The fact that the SAFS community of creation formed a relatively unified and sustained philosophy in itself was a product of their tradition of collective learning and collective creation. The kind of cooperation between animators of the three generations in creation in effect developed a close apprenticeship-like collaboration. In addition, their creation mechanism like field learning and thematic learning provided supplement for them to build up encyclopedic, cross-field knowledge. International communication and exchange as well as cooperation somehow helped enriched their creation philosophy from a wider and broader dimension.In conclusion, the self-imposed innovation of the Shanghai Animation Film Studio community and their open, inclusive attitude are deeply grounded in the then Shanghai cultural climate with which they were nurtured and cultivated; the varied expressions of nationalization in animation development, the diversity featuring the productions created by the SAFS community as well as the Chinese literati human touch deeply embedded in their creations boil down to the cultural gene budding out of the fusion and integration of the Shanghai regional culture and western cultures as time went by. Finally, in response to the mixed comments on the animators community of Shanghai Animation Film Studio relevant to the three periods, the author hopes to open up possibilities for a fair and objective evaluation of the Shanghai Animation Film Studio community of animation creators. Besides, the analysis and extraction of the philosophy of animation creation pursued by this community should provide some instrumental implications for the development of animation in today’s China and is therefore worthy of attention as we explore nationalization in animation and enable young and budding animators today and beyond.