The problem as I see it
If I smushed a banana into the side of a bottle of rum and called it bananas foster, I'd be a laughing stock. The juxtaposition of Joyelle McSweeney's poem with Kevin Cornell's flash animation is a good idea, but just smushing them together is not the way. It's difficult to appreciate the poem while watching the animation. You end up simply watching the flash over and over again in order to read the poem. And why not just read the poem—separately. Meanwhile, the purity and impact of the animation, which is incredible, is lessened by having what amounts to a contrivance of free-floating text compete for your attention. In Tarkovsky's Mirror, when his father reads his poetry, the visual onslaught is temporarily halted in order for us to actually listen to the poems. Then, it resumes. Tarkovsky knew what others have apparently forgotten. What should happen here is the two works should simply be placed together and let the surfer consume both separately in whichever order he so chooses. The right choice is animation first, then the poem. Or wait...
Ok I just had another theory. Maybe the problem isn't the way the two works are mixed together. Maybe it is simply a matter that the poem isn't as good as the animation. I think that could be the problem. "Bad and good for you both..." What is that? That's bad. The animation doesn't need that. It also doesn't need "outflowering." Essentially. It could work. If just a few fragments of the poem were injected. But not the whole thing. Not the whole thing.
|
|