Pharyngula

(via Frolix-8)

Comments

  1. #1 Nathan Perrier
    March 30, 2007

    I don’t get it.

  2. #2 H. Humbert
    March 30, 2007

    Well, it seems to be saying that struggling to meet the standards of beauty set by the media is self-destructive.

    That, or life without breast implants just isn’t worth living.

  3. #3 strawberry blueberry raspberry
    March 30, 2007

    Beauty is pain.

  4. #4 sean
    March 30, 2007

    Aesthetically pleasing, not too shrill… Twistedly delicious! I’m not sure whether the part at the end where it mentions being produced in Palos Verdes, a rich LA suburb, adds or detracts.

  5. #5 beccarii
    March 30, 2007

    I agree with H. Humbert’s comment on “standards of beauty set by the media” – though I think that the concept can be broadened. Those standards are set by the culture, as well.

    It reminds me in style and, to some degree, content of “The Mascot” – see http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0025477/. This and a number of other similarly-produced shorts, beginning early in the 20th century, are collected on “The Cameraman’s Revenge, and Other Fantastic Tales” – http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B00004Y7HC/animofheavand-20

    “The Cameraman’s Revenge” is a very well-done (even though it was done in 1912) animation of anthropomorphization of insects.

  6. #6 Christian Burnham
    March 30, 2007

    Ah- when my friends from Frolix-8 get here- things are gonna get a whole lot better.

  7. #7 TAW
    March 30, 2007

    Very interesting. It reminded me about this computer graphics thing about schizophrenia. Scary.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OYk5SumcxQw

  8. #8 H. Humbert
    March 30, 2007

    Also, I suppose the video might be commenting on how women are sometimes objectified or “put in a box,” made to feel less than human, or that they’re “nothing but a pretty face.”

    I’m sure others can find additional symbolism.

  9. #9 Cathy in Seattle
    March 30, 2007

    yeah, that was pretty much what it was like growing up “girl” in the 70’s. Probably the same now.

  10. #10 Jason
    March 30, 2007

    I don’t know. Personally, I think she looks a lot better with… color. And… eyes.

  11. #11 Krystalline Apostate
    March 30, 2007

    Wow, that was simply brilliant, & lovely in a bizarre way. Imprinting from the television, a struggle upwards towards an unreachable bar of beauty, a willingness to risk oneself to an addictive desire despite possible extinction, & the final tear wept.
    What a statement.

  12. #12 beepbeepitsme
    March 30, 2007

    The struggle for beauty seemed to be self-imposed. The standard was unattainable, yet rather than accept that; doll face was prepared to self destruct.

    It appeared to be the quest that mattered. The results were never going to be able to satisfy the quest. Reminds me of people who are addicted to plastic surgery.

  13. #13 Kseniya
    March 30, 2007

    Probably the same now.

    Probably more so now.

  14. #14 Jan Andrea
    March 30, 2007

    Wow, that was deep into uncanny valley.

  15. #15 Elliott
    March 30, 2007

    I don’t know. Personally, I think she looks a lot better with… color. And… eyes.

    Jason, I would surmise that she sees a lot better with eyes.

    It appeared to be the quest that mattered.

    As Walt Kelly once reminded us:
    “Too soon we breast the tape, and too late we realize that the fun lay in the running.”

  16. #16 Hank Fox
    March 30, 2007

    Whew! –Disturbing image. Humanity in the grip of cold, spidery mechanical limbs, with nothing left but the ability to express naked NEED.

    To me, that was about something broader than beauty. It was about advertising. It was about media. It was about the destructive allure of every prepackaged, parasitically empty image we’re encouraged to absorb or become.

    It was about thin, beautiful models and the latest fashions, but also about A Diamond is Forever, and “Hey, You Never Know” lottery ads, and young Americans dead in Iraq because of the lies of George W. Bush.

    Yes, it was about the destruction that comes from never feeling good about yourself unless you’re striving to become what OTHER people seem to value.

    But it was also about all those forces that SELL us those “what other people seem to value” images: the predatory political parties, the voracious corporations, the evangelical hucksters, the viral patriots who want us all to never question, never doubt, never break stride as we give the last full measure of our lives … to THEM.

  17. #17 Paul
    March 30, 2007

    I didn’t think about the whole reaching for the cultural standards of beauty aspect of it until I read the comments, but it is another good way to look at it. I viewed it as her reaching for the unreachable dream, and preferring to die in the act of becoming something more than she had first been than to continue in stasis. It’s a sentiment I wholeheartedly agree with. It reminds me of that CG short, KIWI that was circulating the web a while back (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sdUUx5FdySs).
    That one made me cry too.

  18. #18 Dan
    March 30, 2007

    Wow. That was powerful.

    I saw the “endless striving for unattainable standards of beauty” angle right away, but I also like the “objectification” interpretation that H. Humbert brought up.

  19. #19 JJR
    March 30, 2007

    Very well done, deep.
    Enjoyed it very much.

    I enjoy even disturbing stuff, if it teaches a deeper lesson. Reminds me of stuff I sometimes see on PBS’s THE TERRITORY.

    on a lighter note, wasn’t there a scene from SNL’s Sprockets where Dieter’s guest is…

    Dieter: “you are but a head in a rusty metal box”

    Guest: “If you had been more careful, I would not be just a head in a rusty metal box.”

    or something like that…

  20. #20 Cailen
    April 2, 2007

    I take this as be yourself. No one is as pretty as the media portrays. Even models get airbrushed. You are who you are be happy and healthy and that’s all you need.

New comments have been temporarily disabled. Please check back soon.