The stylistic elements of this book are not only intriguing, but incredibly well thought out. I loved reading this book by Peter Brown. I agree with all of the comments in this thread. So I had to find other ways of showing randomness in nature, like composition and placement and color and shape. I had to maintain a certain amount of geometry and symmetry in the wilderness simply to keep the whole book looking consistent. In early sketches the trees were more wild and organic, but the aesthetic I'd set up in the first half of the book was SO geometric and precise that wild, organic trees seemed out of place, even in the jungle. One of you wondered why the tree leaves in the jungle were so perfectly shaped, which is a fair question. This sometimes leaves kids scratching their heads, but I feel pretty confident in my decisions. Throughout children's books and animation, storytellers have constantly faced this same funny situation, and most of the time we have to make some sort of distinction between the "people-like animals" and the "real animals." In this case, I decided only mammals would speak, essentially the story takes place in "mammal world," and so none of the birds or fish (or butterflies) can communicate with the mammals.
"Why don't the birds or fish speak?" is a question I sometimes get from kids. Tiger Goes Wild resonated with you.Ī million little decisions go into telling a visual story and things can get surprisingly complicated when exploring anthropomorphism, like I did in this book.
Sorry this is late, I've had a busy week, but just wanted to chime in quickly and say how thrilled I am that Mr.
0 kommentar(er)
