Advertisement

Animated Horse Play

  • Toby Malone
  • Chris Jackman
Chapter

Abstract

Having discussed how it is that artists and audiences may collectively agree on what is happening, this chapter considers how particular means of representation (i.e., employing visually unrealistic puppets) encourage forms of imaginative spectatorship that are playful and pleasurable. We apply Apter’s theory of cognitive synergy to audience’s experience of puppet and horse to describe the overlapping but synaptic identities, and consider ways the puppeteers and production navigate the simultaneous expression of these dual identities to their mutual benefit. We conclude by analysing theories of perceptual affinity proposed by Mori and Cross et al. to suggest that Handspring’s puppets foster strong affective responses because they are “optimally discrepant” from realistic forms of representation.

Keywords

Cognitive synergy Pleasure Novelty Puppets Uncanny valley 

References

  1. Apter, Michael J. Danger: Our Quest for Excitement. Oxford: Oneworld P, 2007.Google Scholar
  2. Apter, Michael J. “Metaphor as Synergy.” Metaphor: Problems and Perspectives. Ed. David Miall. Sussex: Harvester P, 1982, 55–70.Google Scholar
  3. Cross, Emily S., Antonia F. de C. Hamilton, and Scott T. Grafton. “Building a Motor Simulation De Novo: Observation of Dance by Dancers.” NeuroImage 31: 2006, 1257–1267. Online.Google Scholar
  4. Cross, Emily S., Roman Liepelt, Antonia F. de C. Hamilton, Jim Parkinson, Richard Ramsey, Waltraud Stadler, and Wolfgang Prinz. “Robotic Movement Preferentially Engages the Action Observation Network.” Human Brain Mapping 2012, 1–17.Google Scholar
  5. De Jaegher, Hanne and Ezequiel Di Paolo. “Participatory Sense-making: An Enactive Approach to Social Cognition.” Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 6: 2007, 485–507.Google Scholar
  6. Gallese, Vittorio, Christian Keysers, and Giacomo Rizzolatti. “A Unifying View of the Basis of Social Cognition.” TRENDS in Cognitive Sciences 8(9): 2004, 396–403.Google Scholar
  7. Jeannerod, Marc. Motor Cognition: What Actions Tell the Self. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2006.Google Scholar
  8. Kohler, Adrian. “Thinking Through Puppets.” Handspring Puppet Company. Ed. Jane Taylor. New York: David Krut, 2009, 42–150.Google Scholar
  9. Landau, Emily. “Argument: Why War Horse’s Puppets Win by Flaunting Their Artificiality.” Toronto Life, 8 February 2012.Google Scholar
  10. Loveridge, Lizzie. “War Horse, a CurtainUp London Review.” CurtainUp, The Internet Theater Magazine of Reviews, Features, Annotated Listings, 17 October 2007. http://www.curtainup.com/warhorseny.html - Original London Review
  11. Millar, Mervyn. Personal Email Correspondence. 29 June 2015 (2015).Google Scholar
  12. Smith, Peter. “Social and Pretend Play in Children.” The Nature of Play: Great Apes and Humans. Eds Anthony Pellegrini and Peter Smith. New York: Guildford P, 2005, 173–209.Google Scholar
  13. Vervaeke, John. “Chi Explained Without Magic.” Performing Philosophy Symposium. University of Toronto, Toronto, October 2011. Lecture.Google Scholar
  14. Vervaeke, John. “Three Visions of the Nature of Cognitive Science.” UTISM. University of Toronto, Toronto. July 2010. Lecture.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s) 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Toby Malone
    • 1
  • Chris Jackman
    • 2
  1. 1.University of WaterlooWaterlooCanada
  2. 2.Centennial CollegeTorontoCanada

Personalised recommendations