AGI Workshop - Day 6

Reflection:

A lot of introspection today as I continued my weekend wrestle and recollected my thoughts about the direction of the project. Over the weekend I considered where my project could go conceptually if I were to consider the questions raised in my Day 5 Folio 1 Presentation.

What if humans weren’t at the top of the food chain?”

This approach detaches the reflection of humanity’s impact on the development and lifestyles of animals and instead examines how the development and lifestyle of humanity would adapt to these worlds. I struggled to find a lot to express in this idea. Its focus’ comprises of comparisons between animals & humans for food sources, shelter, habitats and survival. It would talk about the introduction of constant danger and struggle that we are currently protected from.

“How would humans survive in the animal kingdom (without the advent of tools)?” 

This would likely make comparisons between animals and humans and their place in the animal kingdom. What are humans better at? What are humans worse at? What lengths would we go to survive? How might we have evolved to adapt to a less convenient lifestyle? This feels like an exploration of how cavemen could have evolved in a more animalistic nature. 

“What if animals had become sentient before humans?”

This raises questions of whether animals could build a society, what an animal society might look like, and how humans could fit into this world. This feels like Zootopia with humans.

Reflection:

After exploring similar premises to see what they could offer me in comparison, I resolved that I had a lot more to say about my current premise idea than these other premises individually. These similar premises do raise interesting questions about the rules of their worlds however, something that I could definitely incorporate into my current premise by considering the flexibility of my world’s rules between vignettes. Having rules that are contradictory or lack definition could be played for comedic value and keep the audience guessing as to where each vignette will go.

I've now definitively decided to broaden the conceptual focus of my vignette sequences to encompass more human/animal relationships of casual and unintentional cruelties, benevolent treatment and comparisons of humans/animals. By making this decision, I now have a more clarified response to the questions raised in the production document:

What do you want your Studio project to do? 

• Allow the audience to reflect on the ethical or unethical treatment of animals by ourselves as individuals and as a society
• The project should use themes and transitions to create cohesive sequence structure and coherent idea structure

What do I want to say with the piece?

• DON’T MAKE IT PREACHY, when I’m told how to think or feel I switch off and reject it - I don’t want people to reject this
• I want to point out ethical/unethical treatment of animals and ask the audience “how do you feel about that?” “What’s your opinion on that?”
• Are we good for animals? (Are animals good for us?)
• Make the audience reconnect with the part of their mind that compartmentalises animal cruelty - Jamie Oliver how to make chicken nuggets, the kids still ate the chicken nuggets

What do I have to do/consider?

• How do I want the audience to feel in each vignette? In the whole piece?
• Twists, reveals, reversals and substitutions have to always serve to keep the audience engaged and surprised, and thinking about that’s going to happen next
• Tonal shape of the project, I will have to make sure it doesn’t jump from heavy to lighthearted in a jarring manner - have some heavier vignettes, have some lighter vignettes, because it’s all flatlining right now (too similar in tone)