I am now thinking that the life drawing classes will be over all too soon. the relationship between movement and the live model has become more apparent as we dealt with sporting poses and weight transfer. I wonder if this can work as effectively for a fully clothed person who is not posing for you? The movement is probably more easy to remember in the minds eye than the actual detail of the subject; and this ;i would think a lot faster to get down on paper.

As for the history part of the course; it has left me wondering how much of today's entrenched values of class, race and stereotypes have there roots in animation.

We are all coded to laugh at the cat when he has his teeth smashed in. But when does this coding stop as the format of the animation gets nearer realism. With the advent of more sophisticated software and more believable characters, this is a question i have to ask. If a near perfect representation of a cat was made i am sure it would make traumatic viewing; but add the moving melodies swanny whistles and usual sound effects then the effect may be a whole lot different.

Because coding is present in one scene, does it mean that the values of the whole peice are effected? Does the title music at the start of a moving melodies cartoon prepare your senses for the probable ultra-violence and shield you from your normal values?

Can the same be said for a less obvious things such as genre?

Maybe british gangster movies?

Or maybe a certain director?

Pre-installed values carried by genre are a very useful tool in this way; they take a lot of the mystery out of the film industry and also cushion the blow of any shock content. This is probably a lot more effective than the BBFC method of cetification and a lot less like the sledge hammer approach.