Interview with the Animator

Most of our research on the broad topic of censorship in children's programming comes from research. However, we were lucky enough to have access to a professional animator who is in the early stages of creating a kids' cartoon. Evan Detwiler is an animator and character designer for Theory Animation, a new but fast-growing animation studio. He is the creator of Ray and Clovis, Theory's first major project, a show about an immature cat and serious iguana living together, and the hijinks that ensue. He was also the author of a webcomic, Dino-Boy, which ended last June (found here). The interview was conducted over AIM.

Our first question is, did you make a conscious decision to make your characters animals, and do you think that affects how they will be perceived by the audience?

Somewhat. I think you're able to reach a wider audience when using cartoon animals, as opposed to cartoon people. Animals just seem to transcend things like race or religion or gender. You can also get away with more when using animals-- animals don't necessarily need to have jobs or go to school-- you can have them do or be whatever you want. I suppose I wanted my characters to be animals not just to be received positively, but also for flexibility in the writing.

Do you find the cartoon medium to be the best format to relay your ideas to the public? Why?

Best format? I don't know about that. It's certainly the most fun format! I just want to tell stories and make jokes and get people to laugh, and cartoons have been a reliable way to do that for years. I've always had a passion for animation. The most difficult part is making sure each joke "reaches" as many people as possible. No matter what you do, you will always get on somebody's nerves, somehow. It's important to use gags that get a laugh out of as many people as possible-- well, for what I'm doing anyway. I know there are some cartoons that purposefully push lines.

Your cartoons won't be pushing lines, then?

Well, to give you some background information, the studio I work for approached everyone on staff and asked us all to come up with possible ideas for an animated series that we could pitch to networks like Nickelodeon or Cartoon Network-- in other words, kid friendly. We're currently pursuing the idea I presented, Ray and Clovis.

But Cartoon Network and Nickelodeon have run controversial cartoons in the past and the present. Ren and Stimpy, Rocko's Modern Life...Regular Show has had some very odd scenes too that don't seem really kid-friendly. Ray and Clovis isn't following in these footsteps?

Don't get me wrong, I'm not producing Muppet Babies. My way of thinking is, if I think it's funny and not objectionable, give it a shot. If it doesn't fly with the rest of the team, don't use it. Ray and Clovis might have a few "odd scenes" here and there, and it may follow in the footsteps of shows like you mentioned, but I can't push the bar as far as shows like Family Guy or South Park. I would honestly like to follow Pixar's lead-- I think they do a very good job creating content that both kids and adults can watch, enjoy, and not be bored.

So let's talk a little about Ray and Clovis's content, then. What is the setting like? Is it a utopia or reality?

How to best describe Ray and Clovis? Most of the time they're just trying to do something pretty ordinary (seeing a movie, going to a gym, trying to find a job, whatever) and it ultimately leads to something extraordinary happening. Maybe they visit the library? You can be sure one thing will lead to another and they'll be in mortal danger before the episode is over (but of course, they'll always come out on top). I'm not sure what category that falls into...

The fact that you're dealing with non-human subjects probably makes that dynamic harder to see.

Probably.

 What is the purpose of Ray and Clovis? Is it meant to just be entertainment? Or is there an educational aspect to it?

Well it's still very much in the early stages. Right now it's largely just entertainment, with a strong theme of friendship conquering all. I wouldn't mind finding a way to mix in a few pieces of educational material, where possible.

What social norms do you think you will be animating into the cartoon, and why? You mention a sort of power-of-friendship concept, will there be any others?

 It's hard to say this early on, but there seems to be a strong 'older brother, younger brother' dynamic between Ray and Clovis. We often see Ray encouraging Clovis to better himself (stop watching TV and read a book, etc). We also see Ray watching out for Clovis on some level.

Do you feel that kids' cartoons have a responsibility to teach children in some way--how to behave in society, academic skills, etc.--or do you think there is value in entertainment for its own sake?

There is certainly value in entertainment, for its own sake. You can be educational on TV, but if you're not at least somewhat entertaining, I don't think people will watch. I think kids' cartoons have a responsibility, not so much to educate on how to be, but on how not to be. It should be clear when a character does something dangerous, evil, or downright stupid. I think everything else is up to the parents.

Shifting gears slightly, I know thus far you have primarily been animating animals with Theory Animation, but presumably eventually you will have to animate humans. You've also drawn human characters in the past, in your webcomic, Dino-Boy. 

I also animated a human in our short film project, Nuts for Pizza

Do you feel like there are any differences in how men and women are drawn nowadays compared to drawing them in the past?

Yes, somewhat, but I feel it goes beyond just cartoons. Lately I feel like there has been this surge in 'cool young people' on TV. Have you seen the Disney Channel, lately? As far as cartoons go, human characters didn't always have to have that "super cool" aesthetic. Look at old cartoons like Scooby Doo, The Jetsons, or Rocky and Bullwinkle... or even slightly more recent ones like Doug or Rugrats... those characters had their own unique feel to their design. When I see cartoon humans on TV now, they're so frequently sleek and stylish-- granted, not all the time-- but it's gotten to the point where we've replaced cartoons entirely, and just put on shows with live action, sleek stylish teens instead. It's depressing for me to see live action shows on Cartoon Network now. That's only my opinion though, of course.

 You think there's a trend away from cartoony cartoons?

 Not entirely that. I think there's a trend toward putting out what's easy.

 What do you mean by "easy?"

In other words, what can we animate quickly, how can we animate it cheaply, and are we taking too big a risk? I feel like whoever is in charge is thinking those things.

What is a risk, to an animation producer? Or to you, as an animator and character designer? Are they the same thing?

Well, I wasn't referring to the people involved with the actual production...

  

Right, a producer, as in someone who's funding the project. I assume that's what you mean by 

"whoever is in charge."

 I meant, whoever decides what goes on their network may ask whether or not the series will be popular, and is there any way for it to make money. That's the risk I was referring to.

 What would a risk be to you? 

From where I sit, I just want to create something that I feel is a quality product that I enjoy, and others will enjoy. The only risk there is putting a bunch of work into something and having nothing come of it.

 If you are drawing people, what race are you more likely to draw them in? How often do you 

consider or are pressured to draw people of different races? 

The only time I had to come up with cartoon people frequently was for my old webcomic. And to be honest, I think I kept a pretty good balance as far as that went. The comic featured people of different racial backgrounds, both as main characters and side characters. I wouldn't say I felt pressured to do that though-- it was my own decision (considering the comic had a very strong 'progressive' theme to it, to begin with).

 Going back to Ray and Clovis, you said that you vet ideas with the team before they get included. How much creative control do you have? If the group vetoed an idea or issue that you felt was really important to put into the show, could you override that? Who has the final say?

The short answer is, I have the final say. But if the group doesn't like an idea, I wouldn't want to make them work on it. It's also a good way to decide if an idea will work for our audience.

 So primarily censorship happens before the cartoon is even made. Are you ever worried about a final project being censored?

We've never had to work with censors at Theory. We're a long way away from having to worry about that. But when the time comes, I feel like I've taken enough steps to prevent Ray and Clovis from being censored too much.

 If a network was willing to accept the cartoon but wanted you to take out potentially offensive material, would you acquiesce, even if you didn't feel the material was offensive at all?

 Most likely. To expand on that, it would be one thing to tell me to remove content to meet their network's standards. It would be another thing if they took creative control and put content in that I didn't want.

Okay, that's pretty much everything. Thank you very much.  

You're welcome.