Tuesday, August 11, 2009

Good To Be Loved

In most ways it's pointless to do this, but I do it anyway. Charles Z. writes from Animation Nation:

The fellow was disappointed in the Guild, as many people are for whatever their reasons. A few days before he visited the Guild's new building on Hollywood Way in Burbank. I knew they were constructing there, but didn't know they've moved in and were operating from the new location.

He commented on how big yet empty the place is, and I said they'll fill it up. He's unemployed by the way, for several months now. He then mentioned that he didn't think the Guild had much interest in helping established members. I asked him why he felt that way.

He said it was economics. A new member means a several thousand dollar initiation fee right away. Older members pay quarterly dues and not nearly as much per year as a new member would bring in from the outset. Older members didn't pay as high a fee to join, whereas new memberships have a bigger initial payoff ...

Let me roll out a few points here, because it's good to know how The Animation Guild works.

We were founded in '52, largely as an alternative to the fading Screen Cartoonists Guild. (An orphan union, since its parent organization -- the Conference of Studio Unions -- had gone under in a nasty jurisdictional spat.)

TAG is run by officers elected from TAG membership. I come from a story background, the vice-president is a writer/story person, the President is an animator, board members are board artists, timing directors, animation checkers, writers, all elected for three-year terms.

TAG has been in six buildings since 1952, owned four of them (probably), and occupied the Lankershim facility for just under thirty years. The single biggest problem with the place was there was minimal parking. (We ran a lot of classes with lots of students so it was an ongoing problem.)

The officers of TAG have discussed acquiring a new building with more parking for a decade. Four years ago, the board began searching for a new location. When a property was selected, the board went to the membership for approval and got it. In late July, we moved in to the new building.

The money for purchase and renovation of the building came out of existing general funds.

Unlike several IA locals (Editors, Grips, Electricians, etc.) the Animation Guild has no industry hiring roster (that's a list of "qualified members" available for work), or call stewards that place rostered members into jobs. In that way, we're more like the Screen Actors Guild, Directors Guild, and Writers Guild.

In my experience, TAG staff spends far more time assisting members in their search for work than non-members or new members. There has been a lot of displacement of veteran employees in the past nine years; I see it ... and hear the resulting anxiety ... every time I walk through a studio. What does TAG do about it? For the last ten years we have been retraining members for c.g.i. work through grants, funding of different guild classes, and TAG's computer lab.

I've been involved with the animation business for thirty years, and this is the most challenging it has ever been. Long term employment is now the exception rather than the rule. Computers dominate all parts of 'Toonland, and if you are digitally challenged -- even if you've worked steadily for decades -- you will have a problem getting employment.

There's also the reality of more people chasing fewer jobs, general agism, and the producers' desires to cut production budgets wherever and whenever possible. (Just a few weeks ago, a studio was looking to get rid of its sick days; TAG assisted the employees in pushing back against the move and got it stopped.)

Face it: we don't live in the happiest of times. When I get too down about it, I remember the immortal words of singer-song writer Roger Miller:

“... But everythin' changes a little as it should, good ain't forever and bad ain't for good.” ...

Add On: Having said all that, the magazine ad is waaay too old.

80 comments:

Chip said...

I just wouldn't sweat it. While constructive criticism is always good, and there are things about TAG that can be improved, it's somewhat pointless to spend too much time dealing with the rantings of Charles Z. over at Animation Nation.

He has had chronic hostility toward the union from day 1, mostly irrational. He continues his intellectual dishonesty about the "no-strike clause," even after the truth about it has been explained to him time and time again, simply in a case of willful ignorance.

First he's angry because he claims that the union only focuses on new members at the expense of old ones. Then, without a trace of irony, he's angry that the union doesn't try to recruit MORE new members. He seems to think that the union should be some sort of outreach program to students and non-animation professionals. He's never seemed to understand what a union is or does.

He has delusions of grandeur and self-importance about the relevance and role of his website. For some reason, he seems to think it has played some sort of instrumental role in animation history, though there is no reality to this. It would be generous to regard it as simply a footnote in the history of the L.A. animation industry. It was briefly an internet "watering hole" with a decent readership, before he went off the deep end and drove everyone away with his constant anger and vindictive lashing out at regulars.

At this point, his site is down to three regulars (including him), none of whom actually work in the industry. There's a handful of his students. I lurk every once in a while just to see what stupidity is being ranted about.

Anonymous said...

Definitely don't sweat it. Wow, what a shocker, there's an unemployed animation artist moaning about the union not doing enough.

Sometimes we work, sometimes we don't. Sometimes the studios treat us well, sometimes they don't. This isn't an easy business to be in. Anyone naive enough to expect the union to be all things to all people needs to grow up. And Charles Z. needs to get some anger management and a new hobby.

Anonymous said...

When you're corporate, you suffer from layoffs, ageism, technology and global tides replacing your job, and loss of insurance and pension. When you're union, you suffer layoffs, ageism, technology and global tides replacing your job, and loss of insurance and pension. We are all living with institutions that are mere ghosts of ideologies long dead.

Everything sold to us by labor and banking lobbies alike continue to be just f'ing band-aids to a dam that has been bursting for thirty some odd years now.

Anonymous said...

Hey Charles, how's that spankin' new and improved union going? You know, the one that's going to provide health and pension benefits for students and freelancers and unemployed folks? Haven't seen any coverage in the trades about it, but I know with your history of getting things done in this industry it must just be a matter of a few more days.

And that glorious independent economy you been working on for the last how many years? By now must be hundreds and hundreds of animators making a comfortable living off that, right? Must be paradise for animators making good money without damn monkey producers and union jerks skimming all the profits and ruining things, right?

Yeah, right.

Anonymous said...

This is all the fault of monkey.

MONKEY!!!!!!

Greg B said...

ROFLMAO!!! I've worked with all the best animation pro's out there, and this thread has me roaring! From my time spent at all the news agencies, I report to you that the animation business is almost as fulfilling as the paranormal UFO ghost-hunter biz.

You animators need to get ship-shape like me!

Anonymous said...

"independent economy" ... i like that idea. so many of us are independent even when working with studios, some times its as a contractor for a picture or having your own entity that you do work through. Why is that a bad thing? just curious....

Anonymous said...

It's not a bad thing. Charles Z. has made it the focus of Animation Nation for years, with constant promises of big changes, novel business plans, and a new day aborning right around the corner. With no results.

Calling for revolution is easy. Creating a revolution ain't. Charles, when his revolution failed, turned to tearing down every one else (studios, the union, Cartoon Brew, Canadians, successful individuals who disagreed with him, etc., etc.).

Anonymous said...

BLAH BLAH blah blah, BLAH, blah blah blah.

There. I've said as much as Chuck Z. has said of importance for 10 years.

Anonymous said...

Charles also seems to have an aversion to any animation-centric site that isn't AN. I've personally seen him lose it on more than one site when someone disagreed with his perspective on the world/industry/whatever. I quit visiting AN years ago, and don't miss it in the least.

Anonymous said...

THAT'S an understatement!! But he LOVES being called "Chuck."

Anonymous said...

I do believe the correct nickname for him is "Upchuck" as it defines his rhetoric style.

Vincent Waller said...

I've disagreed with Charles on a few subjects over the years, but whatever you think of him and or his opinions. He at least signs his name to his convictions.
Throwing insults at anyone from the darkness of anonymity is Weak.

Chip said...

Anonymous or not, when he initiates an attack, he should expect that his sillier points will be pointed out.

He's expanded his attack on the union to include his anger that the union hasn't spent sufficient amounts of members' dues money on...him and his website!

Why on earth should the union have spent my dues money on his website? What a misappropriation that would've been!

Vincent Waller said...

Good points, but attacking anyone anonymously is cowardly.
If they had something to say about a head of a studio, out of self preservation I would understand posting anonymously. IMO In this instance it is weak, and weakens the points the anons are trying to drive home.

Paul said...

Vincent, I can't help but notice you're focusing entirely on the anonymity, rather than disputing what's been said. If the contentions weren't true, then you (or others) could rebut them, rather than focusing on the anonymity.

People have various reasons for posting anonymously, just as I'm sure you have reasons for using your name.

Vincent Waller said...

My reason for posting using my name, is that it is honorable thing to do.
It leads to civil dialogue, rather than slanderous innuendo.

Chip said...

It can lead to that undoubtedly, but I would say there hasn't been any slanderous innuendo in this thread. Criticism certainly, but not slanderous.

Kevin Koch said...

I agree with you, Vincent, that using one's name when posting is the honorable thing to do, and I respect you for that.

That said, I've spent countless hours over many years on Animation Nation correcting misinformation and explaining things. I've also done this in person with Charles. Unfortunately, it has not led to civil dialog. In fact, words and phrases get taken out of context, misinterpreted, and thrown back. So while using one's name does usually promote civil dialog, in this particular case I don't find anything civil about what Charles is doing. It's classic sh*tstirring, and my only answer to it is to ignore it.

Anonymous said...

Will turning off the anonymous post function create a more accurate dialogue?

More civil? Perhaps. But were not fighting with swords and axes here, right?

More representative? Doubtful.

Sincerely,

Anonymous

Stephen Worth said...

I've been on the internet for twenty years, and I decided at the very beginning that I would put my name to my posts. Certain folks may not like what I have to say but I'm a big boy and I am willing to back up my opinions and face the challenges to them. I am of the opinion that anonymity drags down the level of discourse, particularly among comments to blog posts. Anonymous commenters are often a noodge higher than paramecium on the evolutionary scale. It's hard to believe that there's a hominid behind the keyboard in some comments.

As for Animation Nation, I think I have taken more than my share of abuse there, but I really don't care. I keep going back because I have stuff to say. Ad hominem attacks say more about the person slinging the mud than they do me. I can get my message across between the slings and arrows. (Kind of like ducking pies in a Keystone Cops short!)

Vincent should draw the next guild ad. I bet he could do even more with the character than the current one!

Kevin Koch said...

Stephen, there are no doubt times (like every day) when this blog gets pointless or snarky anonymous comments, plus left-field stuff from people who clearly have little or nothing to do with our industry. But at the same time, I have no doubt that we get a more open and uninhibited responses than we would if names and emails were required.

As you say, the message can still come through the slings and arrows, and I'd rather have an unruly discussion than no discussion at all.

Stephen Worth said...

I want to clarify a bit... I wasn't saying that anonymous posters on this blog in particular are lower than paramecium. I meant that anonymous posters in general at all of the blogs I frequent are often seen clinging to the algae on the banks of the pond.

There is definitely a place for anonymity. But anonymity carries responsibilities with it as Vincent points out. But useful as anonymity is, anonymity by itself can never change things. Ultimately, iIt takes someone willing to stand up in the line of fire and take the brickbats to really make a difference.

Anonymous said...

As an ex-"contributor" to AN, it saddens me that Charles let a golden opportunity slip through his fingers. All we can do is wish him the best of luck in the future.
-- Steve Schnier a.k.a. "Ravenshoe"

Anonymous said...

Here we have the head of the ASIFA Hollywood archive and a TAG officer saying they've been treated poorly on the web site being discussed, as well as in face-to-face conversation with the website's owner. Two well-known and respected individuals in the industry.

Is it any wonder those of us further down the food chain wish to remain anonymous?

Kevin Koch said...

No need to clarify, Stephen -- I think it was clear you were speaking generally, and not specifically about the esteemed TAG Blog readership. ;)

And allow me to clarify a bit -- the goal of allowing anonymity here is not with the expectation that comments here will necessarily change something -- it's to foster discussion, to exchange information and ideas, to have a safe place for criticism (of TAG, of workplace issues, of whatever).

It's easy for the discussion to be overwhelmed by whoever is feeling crankiest at the time, but this is a labor union blog that deals with real-world job issues. There's a responsibility that comes with anonymity, but anonymity also provides safety. Without that safety, I know from experience that few people will talk about what's really going on.

And back to the subject at hand, I don't believe signing one's name precludes one from being a troll, and I don't think passing on second-hand anonymous complaints (as Charles did in the AN thread in question) is any less cowardly than simply making anonymous complaints oneself.

Kevin Koch said...

By the way, I want to clarify something that I think is easy to misread from my first comment above. Charles has never been less than polite and civil to me in person. In fact, I considered him more of a friend than an acquaintance, and it was because of that personal connection that I repeatedly overlooked the negativity and glancing personal attacks in what he would write. The lack of civil dialog I mentioned was the on-line dialog.

Stephen Worth said...

Anon Wednesday, August 12, 2009 3:02:00 PM: I need to clarify again! I always enjoy Charles's company whenever I go to his get togethers at the Burbank Board of Realty. He's a genuinely nice guy and feels very strongly about what he is doing. That is a good thing in my book. The forum gets nasty sometimes, but I guess that is the natural state of those sorts of things. I usually take cantankerous behavior on others parts as a reason to be more focused and logical in my own arguments. If I held a grudge against all the stuff said on the internet, there wouldn't be anyone left to be friends with!

Anonymous said...

I wonder why the "leader" of animation nation can't draw?

Chip said...

I wonder why the "leader" of animation nation can't draw?.

That's a dumb thing to say. Of course he can draw.

Anonymous said...

Chucky can draw...he just can't keep a job in the industry. Good thing he's training all those hopeful young kids to get into the industry he detests so much

Vincent Waller said...

Cowardly Shame.

Anonymous said...

What matters in a post , Anonymous or not is the CONTENT.

If we are to discredit all anonymous posts or regard them as "weak" is completely ludicrous!

What about "anonymous TIPS" that actually help solve a crime?
Individuals helping other people and decide to remain "anonymous"?

Who invented the wheel? do you know? a certain caveman, right? what's his name? What about the anonymous proverbs? writings? works of art, letters, architecture, tech breakthroughs, popular cuisine? music? Are/were they any inferior than the ones of which had names? What about writers who use pseudonyms? Uncredited directors? ghost artists?

What is being said, that's what essentially matters.

The only time a post doesn''t count much is when there is nothing substantial to support it, doesn't make sense, illogical , unfounded and totally asinine..

So insults bother you? What if they're true?

I think, in this case-- a thorough research should have been conducted before posting an all out rant against the Guild.. and perhaps, if those stuffs said about "Charles" , AN's past events/issues never happened - then, no one would have even bothered to post, right?

Anonymous said...

Simple experiment, Steve H. Turn off the anon. post option for spell. Turn it back on. Compare results. Or has this been tried already?

Chip said...

I'm not going to get too exercised about anonymity, since it's obvious this entire episode has been a deliberate ploy on Charles' part to goose up his site traffic numbers. He's gloating about it now, over there.

I guess needling/provoking the union has been a proven traffic-getter in the past, so why not stir up some crap now, eh?

Vincent Waller said...

I don't discredit anonymous posts. I understand it is a valuable tool when speaking truth to power.


How does throwing random insults from the safety of anonymity add anything pertinent to the discussion?

I think its a shame when it devolves to and is used for personal attacks on peers.

It certainly appears to have reached that level.

Anonymous said...

Frankly I'd rather not see who is posting and wouldn't mind if all the posts were anonymous. I don't really care who is posting - it is usually pretty clear if the post/poster has any validity or not and if it only means something to you if the post comes from someone special in the industry then you're missing the whole point of this blog. In fact when someone insists that their posts mean more because they're using their name all I get from that is they feel that their name should carry weight with it.
If John Lasseter posted something should it carry more weight than if someone posted the exact same thought anonymously. It's the thought that counts and not who said it.
I made a decision a long time ago to almost always post anonymously on this blog regardless of what I post because I don't feel I need or want the weight of my name (which probably carries more weight than yours, Vincent) to get my points across. It's not out of fear as you seem to think, but out of resppect for everyone else to not try and club someone with my opinion on a blog that isn't mine.
I'd be perfectly happy if Steve (and maybe Kevin) were the only posters that made their identities public.
I've lost more respect for many of those that do post with their real names (regardless of how brave they feel they're being) because of something they've said and since it's such a small business and the chances are I'll have to work with some of these people I think it makes more sense not to know.

And so far all you've done is grandstand and say how brave you are for using your real name when all you've done is attack those who prefer to post anonymously and have yet to enter the real discussion concerning Animation Nation and their attack on the Guild. Is it because you're afraid to say anything because you're not posting anonymously? Because so far despite your claims of bravery you've yet to say anything that takes any bravery to say.
So why don't you post without using youir name and tell us what you really feel...?
The other problem that occurs with non-anonymous posts (as I'm sure the reacxtion to my post will show) is that if anyone attacks something a non-anonymous poster says then they are attacked for being rude and disrespectful. I don't feel that has a place on this type of forum - if somneone says something stupid it shouldn't matter if he's attacked for the statement regardless of who he/she is and not posting anonymously makes that a problem.

Anonymous said...

"That's a dumb thing to say. Of course he can draw."

I've seen his "drawing." It's acceptable. But his designs really stink. Chuck is a good cheerleader. But he's just a monkey with a want for power.

Stephen Worth said...

What matters in a post , Anonymous or not is the CONTENT.

The problem is, without CONTEXT, content is difficult to decifer. When I read something, it isn't just what is being said... I balance that with the established point of view of the person saying it. Knowing the speaker is just as important as what he says. I can learn things from people I disagree with if I know where they are coming from. When everyone is posting under the name "Anonymous" the point of view is totally randomized.

Stephen Worth said...

if anyone attacks something a non-anonymous poster says then they are attacked for being rude and disrespectful.

Rudeness and disrespect don't come from attacking something someone says. They are a result of personal ad hominem attacks against the speaker himself. Vincent has pointed these sorts of cowardly swipes in this thread already.

Anonymous said...

And Vincent has declined to point out the cowardly ad hominem attacks that are the stock in trade at Animation Nation. He's right, ad hominem attacks are cowardly, but let's be consistent.

Charles Z. goes out of his way to misrepresent and tear down anything he isn't an active part of, and he keeps doing it even when he's been corrected. He's also makes ad hominem attacks on his site. His lack of anonymity makes that no less deplorable.

Stephen Worth said...

The best place to stand up and take a stand about unfair attacks at Animation Nation is at Animation Nation. Posting anonymous swipes on another site isn't taking a stand. It's avoiding taking one.

Anonymous said...

(The problem is, without CONTEXT, content is difficult to decifer.)

Well, if you couldn't ascertain the content or the context albeit, the meaning of a post or what is being said then, I couldn't do anything for you!

It has nothing to do where I'm coming from or who I am.

It's all part of the discussion. You just have to accept it or not.
I'm just giving a rebuttal to some opinions about "anonymous" posters.
which, I happen to disagree ...

Oh yeah, and the part about mudslinging about Charles Z? Maybe, he's asking for it!
After all, who threw the first gauntlet?

Everyone seem to agree that he's been doing the same thing with the members of his own site! You pretty much get what you give!

Anonymous said...

Except that Charles has taken to banning anyone from Animation Nation who he disagrees with, especially on political/religious issues.

Anonymous said...

Actually, Stephen, more of your posts would come off better and more knowledgeable if your actual name weren't attached to them. Being aware of your tastes means I have to filter a lot of what you say through the Spumco/JohnK filter and it taints a lot of what you say. Sure, I know that's not all that you're about, but it's still a big part of you and really makes even the least provocative statement you make come into question.
That's not fair, but to be honest a little anonyminity would behoove you if you really wanted to get your thoughts across without your whole jhistory being called into the debate.
Just as everything Steve H writes is filtered through the Guild filter, but since this is his blog there's really no getting around that.

But getting back to the subject that Vincent wanted to so bad to hijack offcourse...
To be fair to Charles, his forum was one of the first places that allowed professionals in the animation industry to converse and diuscuss things on-line and he deserves some praise for that. Unfortunately it has since turned into a place that's only fit for wannabes, fanboys and Charles' toadies (with the occasional professional seeking adulation)and a forum for Charles to espouse his bigotry, religious zealotry, to seek undeserved kudos and advertise for his questionable school - not to mention piss all over any other animation forum or blog that doesn't kiss his ass(which there doesn't seem to be many of).
Quite a shame really and I feel somewhat embarrassed for those that I hear still post there.

Stephen Worth said...

Actually, Stephen, more of your posts would come off better and more knowledgeable if your actual name weren't attached to them. Being aware of your tastes means I have to filter a lot of what you say through the Spumco/JohnK filter and it taints a lot of what you say.

Feel free to filter my taint, but I was who I am long before I even met John Kricfalusi. We're friends and have common interests, but I don't represent him or Spumco any more than a friend/former employee of John Lassiter represents Disney.

Anonymous said...

Feel free to filter my taint.

Good lord, that's an unpleasant visual.

Anonymous said...

The time has come to move on. Animation nation never reflected the industry nor the views of this guilds members. The guild shouldn't have anything to do with a site that is anti union . I suggest that the union president stay off it as well ! I think the membership would rather have him dealing with union business rather than trying to explain endlessly to anti union rabble why it should exist.

I would not trust a single word that comes from Charlie' . Older members will always have a harder time because the companies will continue to hire young people to avoid the cost of experienced artists . This is not the unions fault. Older animators hired at Disney told me they were intentionally were put under juniors to humiliate them and underpaid . A bit of Disney management vengeance I think but not the unions fault.

Remember you when you were a P.A. --- so now you hate me ? said...

"Older animators hired at Disney told me they were intentionally were put under juniors to humiliate them and underpaid . A bit of Disney management vengeance I think but not the unions fault."

------

Nice. A bit of management vengeance for ... what ... ? helping make the Company billion$ of dollar$ from movies like "The Little Mermaid", "Beauty & the Beast" , "Aladdin" , "The Lion King" ... but those uppity animators who didn't know their place in the 90's still need to be humiliated and taken down a few notches with some management vengeance. Real fuckin' nice.

Anonymous said...

Hey, Mr. Worth. Still think that you "can get my message across between the slings and arrows" over there on AN? Still enjoying being attacked for no good reason? By the way, I think Charles revealed why he's so exercised about non-artists 'controlling' artists. Notice this line in one of his recent blasts at you:

None of you have to sign an agreement that compromises, indeed, relinquishes the ownership of your work in order for you to be considered for employment.

I'm pretty sure that's based on some misinformation he heard when he was a guest of TAG at a recent meeting. Yeah, TAG showed him the respect of inviting him to speak at a membership meeting panel, and he returns that respect with bizarre attacks. At that TAG meeting, he heard from someone that Disney's artistic submission form requires the artist to relinquish ALL control over ANY work they submit, even their own personal work.

Of course, the guy who said it was informed he was wrong by people who had actually read the submission form, and the meeting moved on, but the misinformation apparently stuck with Charlie. Even the fact that the Disney submission form is easy to find online, he's still on a rant about it. He also thinks Steve Hulett 'runs' the Animation Guild, when we all know Steve works for us and for the TAG executive board, who are all artists or writers.

Anyway, you'll save yourself a lot of agro if you stop trying to use logic on AN. Charles Z. doesn't want to talk sense. He needs to be angry, he needs to push against any authority.

If he were a soccer mom he'd be the PTA's worst enemy.

Chip said...

Yes, reading Charles' angry screed over there right now on AN attacking Stephen Worth reveals something interesting. The idea that Charles is only unhappy at non-artists "controlling" artists is a canard.

In fact, I suspect Charles would be equally angry at anyone telling him what to do, including a supervising animator, or any artistic supervisor whatsoever. He clearly just has a real problem with anyone having any kind of authority over him, regardless of whether that 'authority' is an artist or not.

Props to him for finding a way to make a living that doesn't involve working in a big studio environment, where he would clearly not work out. Working at a large studio, you have to make peace with the fact that your artistic supervisors are going to have some say over your work. But the idea that he's only angry at "management" types is very clearly a total sham.

Anonymous said...

Well, it's certainly been interesting watching Stephen Worth, who has been among the last steadfast participants and occasional defenders of Animation Nation, get run off the boards today by an unhinged and furious Charles. Complete with accusations of sexism and discrimination by ASIFA-Hollywood(!).

Blaze of glory, my friend, blaze of glory.

Stephen Worth said...

I'm not getting run off the board yet!

Anonymous said...

After seeing how you've been treated there, both in the past, and within the last couple days, you have far more patience and forgiveness than I would.

Or, it seems, most of the rest of the industry.

Anonymous said...

It's like trying to argue politics with the 'Birthers'. They know what they know and if you show them evidence that contradicts their knowledge then you're obviously lying.
I used to support Charles and AN and contribute heavily in words and coin and now I refuse to even go ...especially after he used the board as a soapbox for his homophobic ramblings and other 'born again' preaching.

It's hard to take the man serious knowing that he is virtually unhirable in the industry and yet he makes a living 'teaching' foolish young artists and wannabes how to make in the industry he detest (and destests him) so much.

The reason why I post anonymously here is because (as was suggested earlier) I feel my thoughts don't need my name attached to be taken seriously and there are mutual friends that don't need to know how I feel about someone they may or may not agree about as well as the fact that any smart lawyer will tell you never put anything into writing regardless of what you're saying...so the next best thing is to be anonymous. Even frivolous lawsuits that you can win are still draining and no thoughts put forth in a blog are worth it. I could post using my name, like Vincent, but I'd feel the need to tiptoe aroiund my real thoughts - like Vincent is probably doing.

Anonymous said...

Why are you talking about these people at all ?! Stop inviting them to the Tag parties , stop kissing their behinds ! Cut all connections , erase this thread and get your butts off that stupid site ! They hate the union ! Get it? What is it you are not grasping ? Your membership is here, not there !

Anonymous said...

Oh yeah , and get their damn link off this blog ! Jesus !

Anonymous said...

I've not had the same dislike for Charles that many on here seem to have. Although, I have to admit, in the last several months, I'm starting to think Charles may be insane. I'm not trying to be funny. I really think the guy has some problems and needs to seek help. He has chased practically everyone off his site and seems to pick fights in every thread. Sad.

Stephen Worth said...

Animation Nation is still a forum that a lot of students participate in. They're the reason I'm still there. I can talk over the top of the noise and still reach the audience.

Stephen Worth said...

Vincent doesn't tiptoe. He just isn't afraid to stand up. Admirable trait.

Anonymous said...

>>>Vincent doesn't tiptoe. He just isn't afraid to stand up. Admirable trait<<<

"...I've disagreed with Charles on a few subjects over the years..."

Yes, you are so right what strong convictions and condemnations of Charles Z. I can see whay you admire him.

I still say he might have actually said something of note if he went anonymous, but because he didn't you got this 'scathing attack' and an attempt to derail the discussion about people who sign statements with real merrit anonymously.

Vincent Waller said...

Thanks Steve.
Anon, First I don't think my name carries any more weight than anyone elses. My name and three bucks will get you a cup of coffee.
As a rule I try not to say anything online that I wouldn't say to someone's face.So my theory is, if you'd say it to their face, then you might as well post your name to it.

It really isn't my place to play hall monitor, and I know that. But I've seen the pain that these round robin attacks have caused for more than one of my friends, and in reading these, I had a reaction.
I'm not a friend of Charles and haven't posted on his site in at least four years. But I will say, whether you think he's crazy or an asshole, or whatever, he has the courage to own his view point, like it or not, and to sign his name to it.

Mars Cabrera said...

Vincent Waller = Charles

Vincent Waller said...

LOL.

Kevin Koch said...

As a rule I try not to say anything online that I wouldn't say to someone's face.

Vincent, I don't know you (though I love your work), but I respect your approach, and try to live by the same code. What's been difficult for me to grasp regarding Animation Nation is that Charles does not live by that code.

For years I've patiently dealt with the overt hostility and mistrust he (and others) have thrown at the union on his website, and then been disarmed by how pleasant, thoughtful, and reasonable he is in person. He has never, ever been less than pleasant and supportive in person. So I'd always be stunned when, weeks or months after a long thoughtful conversation in person, he'd blindside me with snark and misinformation about the Guild. And never once did he take even two minutes to contact me to clarify if some crazy rumor he'd heard was true. He'd just go on a rant, always couched in this holier-than-thou guise of caring about the artists.

I continually made it a point to include Charles and the AN community in the public events of the Guild, I invited him twice to be on General Membership meeting panels, I dragged friends to the annual April 1 meeting, and went out of my way to make nice. It was never enough. I've been blindsided by his double standard one too many times. I now take what he writes at face value and as the true reflection of the man.

So it's a great code to live by, but I understand why some people want to remain anonymous regarding those who don't live by that code. The personal attacks get old, and not all of us have Stephen's patience.

Vincent Waller said...

Yes,I understand.

Anonymous said...

Chuck thinks Beowulf is beautiful to look at.

Enough said.

Paul Burrows said...

Charles posted this at Animation Nation:

The next AnimationNation Night is right around the corner, Tuesday, August 25, and we have a great idea for doing something very unique in the community. Some folks out there have had a chip on their shoulder about us for many years, and you can bet they never show up at any AN function. Instead, they spend their time and energy badmouthing us in private email chains and at blogs that aren't managed at the level of professionalism that's a trademark of AN's forums. So here's an open invitation to any and all who have a problem with us.

Just show up and we'll give you the podium at the Realtors Hall in Burbank, so you can tell everybody how you feel about us. Come on out from behind your computer monitor and engage the community like a human being with a backbone. Share your grievances. Let's get this out in the open so you can get over it and put the silliness behind us once and for all.

Pizza and fried chicken, soda pop and water, mmmm... and $3 wil get ya going with the food, $5 will keep ya going.

This is the 6th AN Night in a row coming up, and they've all been a lot of memorable fun. Join us this month as we continue to network, explore, meet new people, and groove with the move. Come on by, let's get caught up and prepped for Disney's Paul Felix who'll be with us next month in September!

AN Night @ 2006 W. Magnolia Blvd. in Burbank 91506

Look for the upstairs hall of the Burbank Association of Realtors.

Doors open @ 7pm, first pizzas around 7:45.

See ya there... Keep Creating!

Anonymous said...

That site shouldn't be called 'Animation Nation,' it should be called 'Alien Nation.'

Charles and his sidekicks have alienated everybody who is anybody, plus there often seems to be more discussion of aliens, ufos, and conspiracy theories than anything related to the animation industry.

Anonymous said...

What a weird theme for an AN meeting. "Hey, I'm going to invite all the people I've chased away and pissed off, the ones who don't read this site anymore, and when they don't show up, I'll stand at the podium and rip on them some more. Come eat pizza and watch me melt down in person!"

Does Chuck really expect Amid to fly in from New York? Or Kevin Geiger from China? Or Brewster from wherever? Maybe Antran and Stephen will show up with their sketchbooks? Are Steve Hulett and Kevin K. willing to waste their time on this? Are any of the scores of real animation professionals that Charles has driven away?

Nope. The odds are higher that Greg B. will show up and use his fabulous network of family and close personal friends to cure cancer.

Hey, here's an idea, Chuck - why don't you do what you promised, and start that new improved union?

Anonymous said...

This is kind of a Bill O'Reilly-esque challenge: if you have a problem with me, come to MY venue, with a sympathetic-to-me-audience, and give MY event a bigger audience and a shot at credibility.

Stephen Worth said...

I'm going. If it turns into a bitch fest, I'll get to take the opportunity to find out if that meteor shower is still going on.

Anonymous said...

Don't forget your sketchbook!

Anonymous said...

My guess is that most artists...especially the ones that have no use for Chuck and his ilk...have better things to do than masturbate in public or watch Chuck do so. I guess SW has nothing better to do...? Maybe CZ should go and try and find some real work instead of earning money off of kids that are desperate. When was the last real job CZ had in the biz - that he didn't get fired from and actually finished instead of leaving a mess for someone else to clean up?
He definitely follows the saying: those that can't do, teach.

Even if I had the time I wouldn't waste it on his disgusting rhetoric. Whoever made the comparison to Bill-O was right on the mark. What a bag of gas.

Anonymous said...

Exactly Kevin. You made every effort , it is time to let Charlie and his site go. Honestly , I hold no ill will, he , it , is just irrelevant . My own stupidity in posting there is what I regret most so don't think it's a criticism , I'd give anything to get that time back. I hope no one else makes that mistake.

Stephen Worth said...

These meetings aren't just Charles. Dozens of kids- students of animation- attend as well. They're well meaning and interested in learning. I'm not going to write them off.

I just wish the subjects of the meetings covered animation topics instead of business theories and axe grinding. That stuff seems misguided and petty to me.

Anonymous said...

Why not go to the actual schools to teach Stephen ? Animation Mentor or on your own thing ? Validating someone , clearly full of so much hostility towards so many , is that fair to the students ?

Stephen Worth said...

I do work with the schools too. But not all students are aware of what we're doing at the ASIFA-Hollywood Animation Archive yet. (For that matter, many pros don't know either.) I can go to the meeting without validating hostility. As Kevin has said, when you are in front of him, Charles is a pussycat. It's only behind the keyboard at two in the morning when he goes ballistic.

Anonymous said...

If you think you can deal with him you are the best judge but , that whole "Hi , I'm Charlie the good , NOW I'M CRAZY CHARLIE !!!! " thing . Add the union hating thing . . . nah . Someone should secretly feed him valiums . =)

Anonymous said...

AnimationNation is not the voice of the industry , nor does it represent the industry in any way . The owners extreme paranoia, constant attacks , uncontrollable self destructive behavior , all these speak of a bi polar mental disorder fueled by a Jim Jones like ego. Exactly why is this Guild indulging and encouraging this behavior by posting responses to him ? This post should be deleted as it feeds an ill man who is jumping around screaming " Please pay attention to me ! "

Site Meter