un-blurring the boundaries between anthropomorphism and ... · web viewas for zoomorphism, in the...

Josiah Watters 0906155 12/01/15

Un-Blurring the Boundaries between Anthropomorphism and Zoomorphism – Analysis of Animals in Animation

Introduction

Anthropomorphism is the term used to describe

the attribution of human characteristics to

anything that is not human. This process can be

seen everywhere in real life, from statues to

dolls, and also throughout history, stretching

back to ancient mythology. While anything

from inanimate objects to fictional deities can

be anthropomorphized, the practice is most commonly associated with animals. In animation,

we frequently see animals walking upright, talking and having higher intelligence. Some

credit children’s nursery rhymes for making this trope so prevalent throughout the 20th

century and causing it to become a figurehead in the animation industry also thanks to

characters such as Mickey Mouse (1928) and Bugs Bunny (1940). (Zipes 2013)

Zoomorphism, on the other hand, is the attribution of

animal characteristics to anything that is not an animal.

In other words, it is the exact opposite of

anthropomorphism. Examples include The Fantastic

Mr. Fox (2009) and Blacksad (2000), in which the only

animal attributes of the characters is their outward

physical appearance, yet they act and live their lives as

if they are humans. Defining qualities often include a

human posture and wearing clothes.

Both the process of zoomorphism and anthropomorphism are seen most frequently in

animation, as the freedom of the media allows life to be breathed into animals and inanimate

objects so they can become interactive characters. However, the exact line of distinction

between the two practices is often difficult to draw and can often to become blurred. The

more human traits an anthropomorphic character acquires, the more likely they are to cross

over into zoomorphism, and vice versa, and it’s debatable where in the spectrum that


transition takes place. In this essay, I shall be discussing the appeal of anthropomorphic and

zoomorphic animals in animation, what makes us willing to suspend our disbelief at their

behavior, appearance and ability to do everything a human can, and at what point the two

meet in the middle. (Bliss; 2014)

It is much easier to approach this subject from a

neurological aspect. From a very early age, we

are exposed to anthropomorphism and

zoomorphism through fairy tales, stuffed toys

and children’s television. It is easy to understand

why a story about woodland creatures going on

an adventure would appeal to young children,

such as ‘Little Bear’ (1957) or ‘The Gruffalo’

(1999) due to the romanticized image of wildlife

and nature that is enforced upon us during our

most impressionable stages of development. The

exposure only continues as we grow older, with shows that appeal to older children, such as

‘Looney Tunes’ (1930) and ‘Pokémon’, also depicting anthropomorphized characters. As a

result of them being so prevalent during our infant years, we do not come to consider

anthropomorphic characters odd or jarring as they have become completely integrated into

our society and values maybe to such an extent that we

do not even realize how much we identify and are

influenced by the practice. ‘Toy Story’ (1995) manages

to appeal to a broad audience which includes all ages.

Children greatly identify with anthropomorphic

characters, but the film is also able to play on adults’

nostalgic fondness for their childhood toys, particularly

in Toy Story 3 (2010), which they would have played

with during a time in their life when they were at their

most susceptible to outside influences and themes. This

kind of warm familiarity and sweetness is what stops

anthropomorphism and zoomorphism from slipping into

the ‘Uncanny Valley’, (Masahiro Mori; 1970) at least


when it is executed successfully. Gill Bliss discusses how our “knowledge of stories, myths

and legends, world religions and different societies are now a huge melting pot of ideas from

which anthropomorphic and zoomorphic characters can be re-assimilated” (Bliss; 2012),

which is why the two practices continue to be revamped and explored with each new

generation of creative minds.

Another reason why anthropomorphism and zoomorphism

work so effectively is that our brains are programmed to

connect with a human figure, regardless of the packaging it

is presented in. The most basic and mildest form of

anthropomorphism would be a character that is

fundamentally still an animal, lacking the ability to do the

majority of things a human is capable of, but still has the

awareness of a human and a certain degree of intelligence

higher than that of its species. An example of this would be

‘My Dog Tulip’ (2009). The next step up the ladder would

be the ability to converse amongst themselves and be

understood by other animals, not even necessarily of the

same species, but not be understood by humans, and still live in their natural environment. In

other words, still be considered normal animals within their fictional universe. An example of

this would be ‘Bambi’ (1942) or ‘Babe’ (1995). Further along the line would be an animal

that has the same intelligence of a human, but is still

consider an animal, and therefore a lesser being, despite

exhibiting an ability to communicate with humans on the

same level and display a variety of complex emotions.

Many academics, such as Manjula Kalliat and Alexandra C.

Horowitz dispute that it is after this step, when an animal

starts to walk upright, wear clothes and start living their life

as if they are human, that one crosses the line from

anthropomorphism into zoomorphism, and one’s character

basically becomes a human coated in fur, with the

occasional quirk related to their unique animalistic

appearance.


There are also many exceptions, contradictions and

discrepancies amongst these steps. For example, in

‘Wallace and Gromit’ (1990), Gromit is established as

being nothing more than an ordinary dog by other

characters, but is still able to communicate more

effectively with humans, despite not having the ability

to speak. Contrast this with ‘Garfield’ (1978), for

example, who is not understood by his owner, but is

often shown having soliloquies with himself. ‘Pokémon’ (1996) is an even more unique

example, as each different type is portrayed as having their own language, but are perfectly

capable of understanding other species besides their own, and even humans, although humans

aren’t able to understand them. And despite

numerous evidence indicating that

Pokémon can be as intelligent as humans

and make ethical choices based on emotion,

they are never treated as anything more

than beloved pets by their trainers.

Anthropomorphism is also a very effective

method of conveying human experience in a more abstract and intriguing way. In the book

‘Thinking with Animals: New Perspectives on Anthropomorphism’ (2005), Lorraine Daston

and Gregg Mitman explain how “Humans use animals to transcend the confines of self and

species; they also enlist them to symbolize, dramatize and illuminate aspects of humans’

experiences and fantasy.” One could make the argument that humans, with our advanced

brains, technological luxuries, and complex and stressful lifestyles, has resulted in our species

becoming somewhat corrupt and disconnected from Mother Nature. Maybe animals are so

often utilized in fiction, particularly domestic and farmyard animals, because they represent

something pure and unsullied. One is more likely to have an angry confrontation and be

treated badly by other human-beings than one is by one’s own pets, meaning people will

often find more solace in the company of animals; because of this, and the romanticism of

animation, when we see anthropomorphic characters on TV, they come across as friendly and

comforting. ‘The Animated Bestiary’ (2009) offers an even deeper insight into the ‘Human

Condition’, as Paul Wells’ suggests that animals are used “as a vehicle by which the

expression on human emotion may be not merely visualized, but recovered and explored.”


During the era of early Disney, some argue that America had become emotionally repressed

from the Depression and Republican conservatism, but emotional life was still alive and well

in animals, which is why they were chosen as the catalysts to express it, and animation helped

creators realize this.

“Animals became a vehicle for a high degree of projection in the formative development of

animation as an art form and in the evolution of animation as an aesthetic language, initially

only acknowledged for its very execution rather than through the meanings and effects it may

have produced.” (Wells, 2009)

As for zoomorphism, in the most extreme cases the characters

are humans in every sense of the word with the exception of

their outward appearance. In the case of Blacksad, Kung Fu

Panda and the Sly Cooper trilogy, the entire universes are

populated by animals, and humans are virtually non-existent,

their role in the world usurped. The absolute lack of human

characters makes it easier for us, the viewer, to detach ourselves

from reality and become completely absorbed in their world.

Within these series, non-anthropomorphized animals often

appear as well, and are given the same social status by the main

cast in their respective series that we humans afford to animals

in the real world, but within the rules and framework of the fiction, we’re not expected to

question this phenomenon. Oftentimes, the personality of a character and the animal they are

represented as are internally linked and play off one another. A particular type of character

will be cast as a certain animal based on pre-existing conceptions about certain species and

archetypes within our culture. For example, in ‘Kung Fu Panda’ (2008) the characters are all

animals typically associated with Asia (panda, tiger, praying mantis, ect.) in order to

compliment the film’s eastern setting. In

the ‘Sly Cooper’ trilogy (2002), the

main character is a thief, and is

therefore presented as a raccoon, due to the

patterns of a raccoon’s fur being

synonymous with that of the classic

‘robber’s get-up’, with the mask over the


eyes and striped tail, and because they are known for scavenging during the night. In

Blacksad, the fact that the characters are presented as zoomorphic animals is barely of any

relevance to the series or its narrative, with only slim correlations between the characters and

the animals that portray them. One can only assume that this was a stylistic choice, as it does

help to define the series and grab people’s attention for its unique approach to

anthropomorphism in storytelling.

In heavily zoomorphic series, you are more likely to

find that the animals were chosen to suit the already

pre-existing character types, whereas with

anthropomorphic series you are more likely to have a

certain personality come through based on the animals

the characters already were. This is probably due to the

idea that having a personality in the first place is a

human characteristic. Within fiction, animals are

labelled with stereotypes in the same way human

characters often are, based on insubstantial attributes

such as race, gender or age. Predators such as snakes, sharks and wolves will often be cast in

villainous roles whereas aesthetically pleasing animals, domestic pets or ones that are more

mainstream and popular will be cast as the heroes and protagonists. Typical examples are

dogs, bears, birds and rabbits. Whether assigning an animal to a character or coming up with

a personality for an animal, we are greatly influences by the real world nature of animals,

their habitats, behavior, interaction with humans and other species, and our own social

perceptions. Numerous examples include pigs being greedy, lions being honorable, deer

being elegant and owls being stuffy. For example, in ‘Cats & Dogs’ (2001), the cats were

portrayed as evil, despite being popular as

pets. However, as dogs are considered

more loyal and already have the status of

‘man’s best friend’, the cats were

relegated to the role of the villains.

Another reason for this may be due to the

fact that cats are more cunning and

intelligent than dogs, and intelligence is

also a determining factor when deciding


if an animal should be a villain. A similar situation also happened in ‘Lady and the Tramp’

(1955), although not to the same extent. In general, cats often seem to be pitted against an

opposition more frequently than other animals (‘Tom & Jerry’, ‘Sylvester & Tweety’) and

almost always end up coming off as the villains in those pairings. Animals may also be used

to represent the ethnicity or country of origin of the character, such as Joanna Quinn’s

‘Britannia’ (1993) which used a

British bulldog as a satirical caricature.

Other typical pairing include French

frogs, Spanish bulls, Chinese pandas

and Canadian moose, all based on the

country the animal either originates

from or is most commonly associated

with in popular culture, such as the

practice of bullfighting in Spain and South America or the eating of frog’s legs in France.

Biblical ramifications may also influence such stereotypes and clichés, such as the snake

which provides forbidden fruit in the story of Adam and Eve. That image of a snake holding

an apple has become a symbolic representation, and as a result,

snakes are often portrayed as deceitful and offer temptation to

the protagonists, such as Kaa from Disney’s ‘The Jungle Book’

(1967) or ‘Abu’s Poisoned Well’ (1943) in which Hitler was

portrayed as a snake.

Occasional, filmmakers will try to subvert these animal tropes.

In ‘Ratatouille’ (2007), the rats, which are generally portrayed

as sneaky, cowardly and untrustworthy, are presented as our

main characters. In the ‘Sonic the Hedgehog’ (1991) games,

the developers purposely chose a hedgehog as they are

considered slow animals, and they wanted the animal for their

super-fast protagonist to be unexpected and original. This

practice was seen again in ‘Finding Nemo’ (2003), when a

group of sharks were portrayed as vegetarians, desperately

fighting against their own animal instincts.


“The film often plays with

perspectives on animal behavior,

turning them around with the

imaginative freedom that the

fantasy mode allows, only to

reinstate them later. Thus a trio of

sharks is reconstructed as a

therapeutic support group,

dedicated to overcoming the animals’ primal, compulsive instinct to eat other fish. The heady

idealism of this self-imposed, anthropomorphic restraint collapses when the sharks get a sniff

of blood and the full force of their natural drives is reasserted.”

Blacksad also plays with the roles and stereotypes of

different animals. During an interview, in reply to a

question about how they decided on what animal a

character should be portrayed as, Diaz Canales, one of

the creators, said:

“Sometimes you know immediately that you need a

particular kind of animal for a certain character, but at

other times it’s far less clear. If that is the case, you

could for example take a less obvious animal, like an

ostrich, and have it play an important part. Things like

that keep it interesting for us as well. You can also play

on the expectations of the reader.”

This also further

re-enforces the point that the character is more likely

to come before the animal when zoomorphism is

concerned. However, one notable exception to this

trope would be Wendy Tilby and Amanda Forbes

‘When the Day Breaks’ (1999), which used

zoomorphism to reimagine a pre-established man and

woman in a chicken and pig respectively. Tilby stated that this was done because they “found

it difficult to design an interesting youthful character without adding prominent sex


characteristics such as eyelashes or breasts without making them look miserable,” in

reference to designing the female character. Turning them in animals enabled them to avoid

the contrast between the two characters’ genders by making them both farmyard animals, but

at the same time not ignore the different, by making the man a chicken and the woman a pig,

which is itself is a subversion of the genders generally assigned to these animal characters in

animation, as also allude to the nursery rhyme ‘This Little Piggy Went to Market’ through the

female character, and the joke ‘Why Did the Chicken Cross the Road?’ through the male. The

use of anthropomorphic dogs also places more emphasis on the zoomorphism of the two

protagonists.

There are several examples of characters within fictional

media reacting to anthropomorphism or zoomorphism in a

realistic manner, such as the insects in ‘James and the

Giant Peach’ (1961). In other words, these are not

universes in which talking animals are commonplace or go

unremarked, unlike the world of ‘Regular Show’ (2010), in

which humans live alongside talking anthropomorphic

animals, and that is just part of normal every-day life.

These themes are often played with, with shows such as

‘Johnny Test’ (2005) and ‘Sabrina the Teenage Witch’

(1996) featuring the protagonist having to keep their

dog/cat’s humanistic abilities a secret from others,

presumably to avoid having them taken away for

government experimentation. In numerous shows a

genuine explanation is provided as to why these

animals have the intelligence of a human, an

example being Chopper in ‘One Piece’ (1997), who

has the ability to take on different forms ranging

from an anthropomorphic reindeer to a zoomorphic

human thanks to eating a magic fruit.

In Hayao Miyazaki’s 1992 film ‘Porco Rosso’, the titular character, an Italian World War I

ex-fighter ace, was transformed into a zoomorphic pig by a curse. The curse takes place


before the beginning of the film’s timeline, and is only mentioned in the film. Little

information is given about it, and the curse, and Porco’s status as a half-pig man, is hardly

relevant to the overall plot of the film, causing some to call it bizarre, out of place or

gimmicky. However, most Studio Ghibli films contain elements of the fantasy genre, and

without the pig curse subplot to balance things out and bring some more light-heartedness,

‘Porco Rosso’ would have been a very politically driven film. The curse also adds to the

romantic subplot between Marco and Gina, as well as Marco’s various relationships and

attitudes towards female characters, both during and before the film’s timeline. Marco

occasionally comes across as somewhat lecherous and sexist, such as trying to deceive Gina

by telling her a kiss from a woman will break the curse, or believing Fio cannot be a good

mechanic because she’s a girl. One could interpret this as meaning that Marco’s appearance

as a pig is a metaphor for his doctrinarian behavior. However, during an interview Miyazaki

stated that Marco was disillusioned with humanity, and cursed himself to be a pig. "When a

man becomes middle-aged, he becomes a pig. Marco was carrying a lot of baggage, and that

has something to do with him quitting being a human”. (Miyazaki 1997)

“Marco the pilot carries with him great metaphoric weight as a creature disillusioned with

humankind. Presented as a therianthorpic character, a human-pig carries with him the

associations in Japan with middle-aged men disconnected from the hopes of youth and

disillusioned by the increasing challenge of the modern environment.” (Wells 2009, p201)

It is also worth noting that characters such as Marco, Blacksad and the two

protagonists from ‘When the Day Breaks’ are much easier to place on the

anthropomorphic-zoomorphic spectrum that say, for example, a character such

as Scooby-Doo, who fluctuates between different extremes of

anthropomorphism and even zoomorphism depending on the episode of the

show or incarnation of his character.

In Paul Wells’ ‘The Animated Bestiary, Wells puts forth

the case that it was natural for humans to utilize animation

in order to do all the things with animals that had been

documented in stories and art throughout history, but were

unable to apply visually in real life, for obvious reasons.

One of the very first animated films was ‘Gertie the

Dinosaur’ (1914), an anthropomorphic dinosaur which was


impossible to realize in any form of media prior to animation. It was also interesting that the

first ever animated anthropomorphized animal was an extinct one. The large amount of

animal characters seen in early animation (Felix the Cat, Oswald the Lucky Rabbit) show

how the media was used as an innovative art form. “Animals became the vehicle for a high

degree of projection in the formative development of animation as an art form and in the

evolution of animation as an aesthetic language”. Many artists take the freedom and concept

of animated anthropomorphism a step further, giving human characteristics to inanimate

objects and mythological creatures. (The Brave Little Toaster, Avatar: The Last Airbender,

Adventure Time)

Critic and writer Howard

Jacobson stated that

anthropomorphism was once

“frowned upon by animal

behaviorists, butchers, livestock-

experts and fox hunters”, as it

portrayed the creatures they

made a living killing in a likable

and humanistic light, whereas

they, in their minds, had

“consigned animals to never feeling anything as we do, and therefore never feeling anything

at all.” (Jacobson 1997, p96) We are unable to empathize with an animal’s suffering, feelings

or experiences, at least not in the same way we are a human’s, therefore we merely make the

animal more human-like in order to make the audience engage, and use anthropomorphism as

an interrogative tool, challenging mankind’s assumptions and treatment of animals. However,

some consider anthropomorphism as a denial of animals’ own inherent ability to express

themselves, and is a suggestion that animals do not have a voice of their own or any sense of

validity. Human treatment of animals is explored at length in Martin Rosen’s two films

‘Watership Down’ (1978) and ‘The Plague Dogs’ (1982), the latter of which uses limited

anthropomorphism with detailed animation in order to present a serious, thought-provoking

story about animal abuse and experimentation, which helps it achieve a jarring realization in

the viewer about humanity’s treatment of animals. “‘Plague Dogs’ sustains its realism to both

distanciate itself from the limitations of the talking animal story.” (Wells 2009, p195) Both

films subverted the practice of using animal characters purely in child or family oriented


animations, however Ralph Bakshi’s ‘Fritz the Cat’ (1972) predates them as one of the first

films to do so. The subject of animal abuse is explored in a more comedic and satirical

fashion in ‘I Am Not an Animal’ (2004) and ‘Chicken Run’ (2000).

Gill Bliss discusses how the concept of ‘The Other’ can be applicable within animation. In

literary terms, ‘The Other’ is any individual that is considered different by the collective,

meaning it could be any type of person within any established environment, and could be

based on anything from race to social class, but regardless of the circumstances, it almost

always results in the so-called ‘Other’ being considered of less importance by whatever the

local hierarchy considers to be ‘normal’, and often gets characterized derogatorily. One could

also make the argument that animals are seen as ‘The Other’ within human society, due to

having few or no legal rights, and are considered to be lesser beings by comparison, although

sometimes with justification. Sociologist Zygmunt Bauman stated in regards to ‘The Other’:

“Woman is the other of man, animal is the other of human, stranger is the other of native,

abnormality the other of norm, deviation the other of law-abiding, illness the other of health,

insanity the other of reason, lay public the other of the expert, foreigner the other of state

subject, enemy the other of friend.” (Bauman, 1991)

Anthropomorphism in animation puts humanistic qualities, feelings and responsive attributes

to creatures whose existence is generally considered as being worth less than that of our own,

and as a result, the practice resonates with people’s core emotions, and resistance to social

conformity. Anthropomorphism consequentially forces us to question our own opinions in

regards to animal otherness. In fact, anything within animation that is not relatable or we are

unable to feel an inherent connection to has a chance of becoming ‘The Animated Other’,

meaning anthropomorphic and zoomorphic

characters are particularly susceptible to

falling into this allegory. Since animation is

such a versatile form of expression, anything

has a chance of becoming ‘The Animated

Other’ depending on the style, execution and

quality of the animation. Generally, anything

that falls into the ‘Uncanny Valley’ territory

can be considered The Animated Other.

‘Creature Comforts’ (2003) managed to subvert this practice by recording interviews with the


British public, usually about nature and animals, and then animating animals for the pre-

recorded dialogue. “The central joke in the series is the incongruous placement of ill-

informed or highly subjective human perspectives in the mouths of animals.” (Wells 2009,

p166-167) This stark contrast exposes the unselfconscious ignorance people harbor towards

animals.

Most animal characters are defined by the emphasis and relevance placed on their level of

anthropomorphism or status as a non-human living being. The role and treatment of animals

in our society is discussed and explored through the use of anthropomorphism in Halas &

Batchelor’s 1954 animated film ‘Animal Farm’. Based on the book by George Orwell, the

story was a satire of social Marxism and the Russian

Revolution, accomplished through the use of farmyard

animals. When adapting this into animated form, Halas &

Batchelor employed the technique of anthropomorphism to

seriously portray the dramatic story and “make the animals

work successfully as believable characters”. Their goal was

also to subvert the generalization that all animals in

animation are meant to be funny, as they needed “an

inherently warm-hearted response to the animal”. In the

film, the pigs are portrayed as more anthropomorphized

than the other animals, having the ability to speak and make

more human-like gestures (in the case of Napoleon,

this is done to purposely mimic the gestures of

political leaders). As the film progresses,

Napoleon and the other pigs become even more

anthropomorphized as they start living in the

farmer’s house and gaining more power and

control over the other animals and the farm,

eventually crossing the invisible line into

zoomorphism. This acts as a metaphor for the

evilness of man compared to animals; Farmer Jones, the only prominent human character in

the film, is initially presented as the main antagonist, until Napoleon surpasses him in that

role, and ends up become more human-like in the process. Both treat the more primitive


animals poorly and derogatorily, who are presented as pure through the use of minimal

anthropomorphizing, limited to being only enough to portray their emotions and suffering,

which is something animals already have, such as the scene in which Boxer is taken away to

the glue factory after being injured or the chickens are forced to give up their eggs. Both of

these are very real situations which happen to animals all the time. It’s through the use of

subject matter like this that the story of ‘Animal Farm’ stays firmly grounded in reality,

despite the heavy employment of anthropomorphism and zoomorphism, or maybe because of

said employment.

In conclusion, it’s clear to see why both anthropomorphism and zoomorphism are such

popular techniques, particularly within animation; however, the point at which one makes the

transition into the other will probably always be subjective. In most cases, people tend to

assume that any human-animal hybrid character has been anthropomorphized, often due to

being unaware of the term zoomorphism and what it means, meaning all such characters will

be lumped into the same category. However, while it is true that Blacksad and Mr. Fox are

zoomorphic characters any more than you cannot deny the fact that Bambi and Bugs Bunny

are anthropomorphic characters, with characters such as the Hindu god Ganesh or the

Muppets opinions become a lot more divided as to what they should be defined as.

Regardless of what category any of the characters discussed in this essay fall into, they are all

successful in appealing to a wide audience of all ages thanks to the unique execution of

anthropomorphic and zoomorphic technique in animation.

Bibliography

Atkinson N, 2006 The Use of Anthropomorphism in the Animation of Animals [online dissertation] <http://ncca.bournemouth.ac.uk/gallery/files/innovations/2006/Atkinson_Nicola_6/NAtkinsonInnovations.pdf> [Accessed 05 December 2014]Arendt H, 1958 The Human Condition, 2nd edition, (Chicago) by The University of Chicago 1998Bauman Z, 2002 Zygmunt Bauman: Order, Strangerhood and Freedom [online dissertation] <http://the.sagepub.com/content/70/1/36.short> [Accessed 19 December 2014]Bauman Z, 1998 Zygmunt Bauman: Personal Reflections within the Mainstream of ModernityBekoff M, et al. 2007 Naturalizing Anthropomorphism: Behavioral Prompts to Our Humanizing of Animal Printed by Isaz 2007.


Bliss G, 2012 Animals with Attitude, Critical Perspectives on Animals in Society SymposiumCanales J, 2010 Orson Welles as a Hippo - Juan Diaz Canales Talks About Blacksad #4 (Part 1) [online article] Published by Joe Gordon <http://www.forbiddenplanet.co.uk/blog/2010/orson-welles-as-a-hippo-juan-diaz-canales-talks-about-blacksad-4-part-1/> [Accessed 22 December 2014]Chaminade T, et al. 2007 The Author Published by Oxford University Press. [online article] <http://scan.oxfordjournals.org/content/2/3/206.short> [Accessed 22 November 2014]Jardim T, et al. 2011 Anthropomorphic Character Design in Animation and Sequential Art: The Symbolic Use of the Animal to Portrsy Personality [online dissertation] <https://www.academia.edu/976255/Anthropomorphic_character_design_in_animation_and_sequential_art_The_symbolic_use_of_the_animal_to_portray_personality> [Accessed 05 December 2014]Manjula K, 2012 Beneath the Anthropomorphic Veil: Animal Imagery and Ideological Discourses in British Advertising, MEDIA@LSE Electronic MSc Dissertation SeriesMiyazaki H, 1997 Animerica Anime & Manga Monthy Copywrite 1997 Viz Communications, Inc. <http://www.angelfire.com/anime/NVOW/Interview1.html> [20 December 2014]Wells P, 2009 The Animated BeastiaryWhitley D, 2012 The Idea of Nature in Disney Animation. 2nd ed.Zipes J, 2013 The Golden Age of Folk and Fairy Tales

un-blurring the boundaries between anthropomorphism and ... · web viewas for zoomorphism, in the...

Documents