I’m trying to keep my mind as straight and positive as possible, without stirring up more of an argument that is needed. I understand that a character design plays a preliminary role that helps form the foundation of a strong animation piece. Perhaps I’m arrogant or it’s probably the fact that certain teaching aspects contradict each other amongst different teachers or even within single teachers’ lectures at A.I.
The fact of the matter is; should I choose to grab a chicken and connect its bottom half to a cartoon characters upper torso and have to right to call it logical is strictly my artistic liability. Frankly, I think Joe the cartoon is pretty damn boring and I think I would rather have him fix my plumbing problem.
Not everything I draw is going to be successful. I’ve painfully come aware of that in high school. However, if one decides to feed me some constructive criticism on my work, please, give me something I can chew on for a while! Give me something like his nose is too big and will cause allergies because of his feathers.. Oorrr.. Do Chickens have ears?.. maybe you can hint on ears?.. Does he fly, in not, what’s the point of feathers?.. Things of this nature.. U know..
With the success of extreme stylized cartoons such as Sponge Bob, Adult Swim characters, even way back to Bevis and Butthead… there is hardly any room to build up what’s rational for a character these days. The difference between what I see in my own work and what others may see is that I have to power to own it. If I choose to wake up tomorrow and wipe my butt with two pieces of leaves, stick them together with gum and name him “Joe”.. That’s all on me. As long as I can come up with some sort of Animation to entertain ya’ll, then I’ve done my job.
Of course, shoot me now if you want to buy the rights for Chuck the Chicken with demands of a more realistic approach, but last time I checked, that hasn’t happened and he’s not yet for sale.
Here a few character designs that I often wonder why they made the cut?... Should it matter? no!