Is television still ahead of the race?
The "Happy Tree Friends" phenomenon is part of the massive shift of eyeballs away from traditional media like TV toward the Internet.

"Happy Tree Friends" is at the forefront of a number of brands that are defining their success first in the online space, and then building from this strong audience base toward other media like TV, interactive, etc. The audience is in the millions online, clamoring for original content that they can share with their friends.”

It seems that the Internet is gaining a strong foothold… Do we consider the Internet a mainstream media then considering that its reach might even exceed that of the television?

Or is television still THE mainstream media? What do we mean by mainstream media anyway?

It seems to me that in today’s society, being able to please online audience is more important than pleasing audience at home watching TV… considering that success is more dependent on the Internet that is wider in reach?

Take the success of "Happy Tree Friends" for example. Many are concerned about the show, especially now that it is being screened on TV… Parents are afraid that their children might be exposed to “bad influence” as they would call it. But it doesn’t seem to be so simple anymore. These concerns might be raised but that’s not stopping "Happy Tree Friends" from being screened on TV.

Also, a point to note is that even though parents might oppose to their children watching "Happy Tree Friends" on TV, there’s no telling that their children would not turn to their alternative – watching it on the Internet itself which is so readily available.

With the power of the various media today, my opinion is that it is no longer a one-man show... Television no longer in control? Television might be the official mainstream media in name but the Internet might be the mainstream media that is in power… If we think about it, it seems as though we can do without a TV these days. All we need is the Internet.

To put it simply, what we can get from TV, we can easily get from the Internet – news, even television programmes, and we are not talking about just what we get on local channels… it’s what is shown on other people’s local channels (it’s international!) and we can even get it real-time.

What about our TV? Can it do the same?

In the past, the TV was considered to be our “eyes” in the sense that the TV is the window, which allows us to “see” the world through it.

But today, is that really the same? Are we still as reliant on the TV?

Look at what "Happy Tree Friends" can achieve by simply starting out on the Internet… What does this imply?

Coming to think about it, if the Internet can do what the TV does, but the TV is not able to do what the Internet can do…

Can we then say that the day will come when the Internet will replace the TV? And that day might be imminent…

Take your pick

If you were stranded on a deserted island, which of the following would you pick given 2 choices:
A) TV
B) Internet (of course, I mean with a computer attached if you pick this option)

Think about your choice… Why? What is this telling?

Labels: cultural anxieties, Faustina, Media, personal opinion, technology

We call it cartoons… But it’s no longer for children?
Cartoons = children as audience?

Genres and target audiences are often explicitly and inextricably linked, genres are often defined (especially industrially) by an assumed audience segment. Often, by labeling a genre as cartoons, we naturally associate it with children, and thus tend to assume that it is appropriate viewing for children.

But is that really the case in today’s context?

Just by looking at the characters from "Happy Tree Friends", we are often misled. But when we finally catch an episode, we experience for ourselves that appearances can be deceiving…

"Happy Tree Friends" is rarely ever happy and far from family-friendly. In a sense, it seems that cartoons have taken a turn toward catering to mature audiences.

Ramin Zahed, editor of Animation magazine, said "Happy Tree Friends" may be only the latest in a continuum of content once thought offensive, like "The Simpsons" or "South Park," but now accepted as mainstream. Cartoons already airing on cable networks like SpikeTV are more outrageous than "Happy Tree Friends," he said.

Considering the fact that such controversial cartoons are actually well received and almost becoming a trend, what is it telling? That controversy is the way to go?

Also, the question that I’m wondering now is, why cartoons? Why of all genres, are cartoons chosen to depict controversial content?

Is there a certain masking effect that is embedded within cartoons?

Do we find it easier to consume controversial content through cartoons because we tend to assume them to be harmless, and thus much anxiety is exempted from the genre?

Labels: cultural anxieties, Faustina, Genres, personal opinion

Round 2: Violence vs. Gore
Check out this interesting “Tom & Jerry” episode I found on YouTube.

Do this experiment if you are game. It’s pretty interesting. Watch this episode twice. (Advisory: Do it only if you have the time)

The two videos feature the same episode.

Tom & Jerry - Jerry's Cousin (Sound Dubbing)



Tom & Jerry - Jerry's Cousin (Original)



How did you find this episode?

Personally, I found it really interesting… It’s obviously an episode of “Tom & Jerry”. Yet, with the sound dubbing that’s done (with lots of vulgarities), it feels kind of awkward (even uneasy?) to know that it’s coming from “Tom & Jerry”.

The point here is to note that the scenes are still originally “Tom & Jerry”. But why do we feel that the episode is suddenly so violent. Is it just the vulgarities?

Think again.

The scenes are noticeably violent as well. Why haven’t we noticed that before? I find it really interesting that generally, we accept “Tom & Jerry” as a family-friendly cartoon where children and adults alike can sit down, watch it together in the living room, and have a good laugh over it.

These are obviously very violent cartoons that we are watching. Why is it acceptable then? What is this telling?

Some questions that we can think about the whole notion of cartoons. How do we define cartoons anyway? What is considered acceptable or not acceptable?

1. Is violence in Tom & Jerry acceptable because it is a cartoon? Why is it then that we cannot accept "Happy Tree Friends"?

2. Is violence in Tom & Jerry acceptable because the characters do not speak a regular language, so no vulgarities? Isn’t this the case for "Happy Tree Friends" as well?

3. Is violence in Tom & Jerry acceptable because there is no blood spilled in there? So this is the difference that separates "Happy Tree Friends"?

§ Just like in good old cartoons where the characters never die no matter what mishaps they face?
§ Is that even reality? In reality, there are obvious consequences. Are we then afraid to face consequences? Is that an anxiety that we face?
§ Does that explain why we cannot accept "Happy Tree Friends”? Because the show is very graphic with blood and guts pouring out at every possible occasion and no character is spared?

One fan, Matt Kramer, 17, of Los Angeles, defended "Happy Tree Friends" -- or HTF, in Internet shorthand -- in an e-mail: "Tom and Jerry was incredibly violent," he wrote, but "Tom the cat simply had a pancake face when hit with a skillet, his skull didn't crack like medical science tells us it should. With HTF, every little thing leads to their ultimate death, thus showing consequence."

In fact, "Happy Tree Friends” shows why it is perhaps not the best idea to have a campfire in your wooden tree house, or hang your head out of the window of the school bus, and plays the modern counterpart to the old-style fairy tales of the Brothers Grimm, which showed naughty children just what happened if they wandered too deep into the forest.

I came across this interesting reading from a book entitled On media violence by Potter, W. James.

What caught my attention was that in the book, he mentioned that social scientists continually find cartoons to be the most violent of all television genres.

Cartoons do present very high rates of shootings, stabbings, bombings, and the like. These are violent actions… the cartoon “Tom & Jerry” contains so much violence that if you took away the violence you would be left with nothing. But the public discounts these actions when they appear in a fantasy or humorous context, such as a cartoon. The public reasons that when “Tom & Jerry” are stabbed or blown up, they are not really hurt, so there is no harm there is no violence.

“Tom & Jerry” would be considered very violent by content analysis and not violent by the public. The difference in definitions is traceable to the focus of concern. The public wants formulaic action – that is, safe, sanitized violence (no graphicness, low harm) that does not threaten them (not shocking, low reality), and in which the good guys are strong and prevail (high revenge, high justification). When members of the public see this formula in action, they see no violence and no need to complain.

How do you relate to this? I hope this leaves you thinking…

Labels: cultural anxieties, Faustina, Genres, Jerry's Cousin, Media, motifs, personal opinion

Round 1: Violence vs. Gore (Part 1)
Ask yourself this question: Is "Happy Tree Friends" more violence or gore?

If you think it’s probably more gore and if that explains why it actually turns you off…

Think again. Why do you feel this way?

What is this telling? Is violence more acceptable over gore?

Let’s just put it this way. Personally, I feel that violence is becoming a common feat these days. We see violence depicted in media all the time and we think nothing of it. This is worrying as it is as though this constant exposure over time is leading us to see violence as a natural occurrence… and eventually, desensitizing us to violence?

So in which case, is violence becoming a part of our culture? So is it just a matter of getting used to?

In that case, the popularity of "Happy Tree Friends" is perturbing…

One would think the show's content would turn many viewers away from the program. But ratings and product sales tell a different story. “Even through a blood-covered window, it's easy to see the growing popularity of these creations. Every week, 5 million people watch the episodes over the Internet. Almost a million are subscribed to the mailing list.”

With the connectivity of media today, it has definitely help to speed up the spread of the cult culture of "Happy Tree Friends". Since the show's humble origins on the Internet, it has moved on to its television debut on MTV's Downloaded, a program showcasing the best in animated shorts from the Internet, DVD release, it has now spread to the G4 television network where millions of viewers watch the show regularly, and soon… "Happy Tree Friends" will march its way onto game consoles, handheld systems and almost certainly the PC.

What is this telling? There will come a day when even gore might stomp its way into our culture and be acceptable as mainstream?

Watch out! That day might be just be imminent…

As Cuddles would put it – “Resistance is futile.”

Labels: cultural anxieties, Faustina, Genres, Media, personal opinion

Life Full of HTF
It makes me wonder how life would be like, full of HTF…

HTF Mimobots(Thumbdrive), HTF Volume 1. TV Series




In my bag lies:





Giggles Death Mints, Cuddles Happy Lips (Lip Balm)




If this describes a number of people, I really cannot help but worry about what actually runs in their minds. This is enough to prove that they are HTF fanatics, and with these gory-looking items around, they are constanly being reminded of the violence and gore. I believe HTF in this case has gone beyond the pure function of entertainment or stress release.

I would feel intimidated by someone like this.

Views, anyone?



*Pictures from Happy Tree Friends Official Store at (http://happytreefriends.fanfire.com/cgi-bin/WebObjects/fanfire.woa/wa/artist?artistName=Happy+Tree+Friends&sourceCode=HTFWEB)

Labels: HTF merchandise, personal opinion, SinYee

A personal opinion

Honestly, I have a very strong aversion to watching something as gruesome as these web clips. Watching a medley of these episodes make me cringe and leave me awash with an unsettling feeling. I seem to feel a little of the excruciating pain with every whimper, groan and outburst in pain. The sound effects do not help either. A burning question that runs through my mind – why must the characters resort to such silly, extreme measures to get themselves out of a sticky situation, i.e. decapitation, maiming oneself? Oddly, as twisted and exaggerated as the turn of events are, it seems perfectly acceptable up to this point that I could be in the position of these animated fuzzy animals with sadistic displays of torture. This point absolutely confounds me. How is it possible that I can identify with the positions of these characters?

Perhaps it is the urbanscape, or rather, a deep-set form of human paranoia embedded in the narrative that I identify with. These clips feature potential (though not imminent) dangers - of technology, of our fellow man, of nature (or rather, man'€™s attempts to tame/alter nature) - posed in urban life. The setting of each clip - more often than not - is within a cultural context that I comprehend and live in everyday; whether it is the park, or the diner, gym, etc. these are all part and parcel of the urban jungle we live in and take for granted. Yet, these places become sites for the most tragic accidents. In 'Ipso Fatso', the technology that we take for granted to be reliable and accident-free runs amok due to human error when Disco Bear squirts water onto the treadmill. In 'Flippin' Burgers', a casual day out at the fastfood restaurant goes horribly wrong when Flippy, the psychologically scarred veteran goes deranged at the sight of Giggles covered with what he mistakes as blood and triggers him into a bloodthirsty rampage for more bloodshed. This is echoed further in 'This is your knife" where Flippy gets flashbacks to war scenes and ends up killing everyone else. It seems to suggest soldiers who have gone out to war have developed a taste for blood that may not be tamed and danger lurks not from outside but within us. Lumpy, in 'Out on a Limb' ends up having his leg pinned down (which he eventually maims) by the very tree he had tried to chop down; an overt action by humans to control his environment (nature).

(On a sidenote, my ability to identify with an American export such as "Happy Tree Friends" also reflects how globalised we are as a world. It also shows what Iwabuchi terms as cultural closeness between Singapore and the US, but that is something I will have to take up separately.)

The next question then pops into my head - €“why do people still watch such episodes? Why would anyone want to put themselves in the uncomfortable position that I am in right now? By ignoring the disclaimers and warnings and going ahead to watch the episodes anything -“ am I asking for it? Could there by a functional purpose to these clips? Exactly what messages are being perpetuated that could be of cultural use? Here are some possible messages one could gather from watching one of these clips:

Msg#1 Power relations - the capitalist is always privileged above the poor little man.

In 'Meat me for lunch', the crooks pay dearly for stealing food in an effort to feed themselves, for they end up on the menu as minced meat. The efforts on part of the creators for using the pun in the title is definitely not lost here.

Furthermore, power relations play a part in this episode.

The clip reinforces a capitalist work ethic by suggesting one must support oneself via legitimate means and not resort to stealing. Therefore, one who subverts this through the criminal act of stealing must be punished and naturally so - the crooks end up in the sad predicament as a result of their actions. Hence, violence is justified somewhat because the crooks get their just deserts.

Yet, the butcher (Lumpy) isn't punished for committing something as unethical as selling this freshly minced meat in the pursuit of legitimately earning one's keep, as illustrated by Petunia chomping down a hotdog she has obviously procured from the shop. It would seem that the law is on the side of the (unscrupulous) bourgeoisie/capitalist, who sets out to capture the greatest profit by selling whatever commodity he has to offer without any regard for ethics and morals. And the consumer is none the wiser about this horrible, unethical act - or at least till it is too late, when you find an eye in your mouth.

Msg#1a Economics over moral/ethical concerns

The fact that Lumpy goes unpunished and is allowed to carry out this unscrupulous manner of conducting business also suggests a privileging of economic concerns over and above moral/ethical concerns of cannibalism. It seems anything and everything goes so long this priority of accumlating capital is upheld.

Msg#2 Power relations - gender inequality

The portrayal of Petunia as the dupe consumer (dominated position) as opposed to the dominant position of Lumpy the unscrupulous capitalist seems to reflect a patriarchal discourse that is dominant in our society today whereby females are slighted based on the socially constructed stereotypes relating to their gender.

The cultural repertoire circulating in society today regarding gender stereotypes present both males and females at polarities - males are superior to females because they are more rational and by that basis, intellectual compared to the irrational, sensitive and emotive female. Certainly, that is the view perpetuated here, as the conniving male butcher gets away with his capitalist scheme and tricks the unsuspecting consumer based on a trust (that morals and ethics are upheld) that is taken for granted.

Further, the association of the male with an occupation such as the butcher suggests a type of masculinity - violence, macho-ness and ruggardness - an occupation of which the female cannot occupy because she lacks these traits.

Having identified these messages, it would seem that these web clips though graphic and violent, do reinforce the current accepted norms and values of society, albeit indirectly, by testing the boundaries of morals, norms and values through exaggeration. Then, one would have to consider the following: Are these messages really important? Do they really affect the audience? One knows all too well of parents refusing to let their children watch HTF or even protesting to the media to regulate these episodes. However, over time one only remembers Happy Tree Friends episodes to be gruesome and forget the details. Hardly anyone remembers specific episodes, at most, they remember HTF episodes depict events that are socially disdained and frowned upon. As Joke Hermes's study reminds us, while we can identify certain encoded messages within the cultural text, we should not be too quick to forget the fallacy of meaningfulness and assume that these texts do have an effect on the audience. Do we really become violent after watching too many of these episodes? Does watching so much violence over time make one become immune to it? Or are these certain assumptions part of an ideology that seek to discipline our behaviour? That perhaps, should be the focus of another audience ethnographic study.

Labels: cultural anxieties, emily, Flippin' Burgers, Ipso Fatso, Meat me for Lunch, Out on a Limb, personal opinion, power relations, This is your Knife

Read 'Em and Weap

While the main theme that Happy Tree Friends is dealing with is violence and gore, I feel that this episode actually provokes more emotion than the rest. Its sadistic nature goes beyond the usual motif of cute little characters getting killed in horrible methods. Why do I say so?

In this episode of Read 'Em and Weap, Pop and cub are the main characters. Pop read a horror story as cub’s bedtime story, resulting in cub being possessed. Cub goes on a rampage and starts to eat people. Finally, the priest Lumpy arrived and managed to conduct an exorcism to rid the evil in cub. However, Pop does not know that Lumpy has succeeded and killed his son by accident.

Coming from an Asian society whereby relationships are valued strongly, I felt repulsive after watching this. People may argue that Pop was trying to get rid of the evil in our society, that he’s actually doing his part as a citizen, but, how could he have the heart to kill his son so easily? Is there another method that could actually solve the problem instead? Lumpy managed to purge the evil out cub without violence, so does it mean that there’s an alternative? And when all things fail, do we have to resort to violence as the ultimatum?

If we read about a case in the newspaper about parents killing their own children, we feel disgusted. How could parents kill their own blood? Yet, when this situation is manifested in the cartoon, people do not even give a second thought about it. Why is this so? Maybe people would think that cartoons are meant to be taken lightly, that we should not confuse the virtual and the reality. But doesn’t this actually reflect the sadistic nature of humans, their indulgence in violence and perverted fantasies?

E.F.M. Durban and John Bowlby have argued that human beings are inherently violent. And this gives as some insight to the establishment of such a website (cartoon) and its growing popularity. It is scary to think that violence is within us, that all the time, we are actually suppressing this emotion. This leads us to another question. What will happen when all these emotions are released one day?

Labels: cultural anxieties, geck ying, personal opinion

‘Out on a Limb’ -- Popularity of HTF
It really makes me wonder what it is that makes the Happy Tree Friends series so popular, to the extent that fan clubs and online stores selling a whole range of HTF products have been established, in addition to a handful of websites featuring HTF online games and podcasts. Looking at an episode with one of the highest view count and ratings (reference to YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RO7Q1tMGE7g) – ‘Out on a Limb’, the following few factors might be the attraction.


Violence and Gore

The gore within the scenes is no doubt the main appeal. In this episode, Lumpy’s right leg was stuck under a fallen tree (which he himself chopped), and tried to free himself by amputating his right leg, all with a spoon. Lumpy let out cries of agony as he slowly cut his limb of bit by bit with the tiny spoon. As much as how this is awfully disturbing to some, it appears to be entertaining to others who need an outlet for the pent-up frustrations or displeasure, or simply those who are psychopathic. Many see violence and bloodshed in shows as a high level of entertainment though considerably fearful of them in real life, and hence cartoons being a less realistic option possess a higher appeal.



Amusement derived from the stupidity of the characters

Right from the start of the episode when Lumpy made the tree fall on himself, a whole chain of hilarious happenings were sparked off. First, the axe actually flew off when he tried to cut a branch to free himself, and then he finally realised that he had dismembered the wrong leg, after all the agony he went through. This inevitably provokes tremendous laughter despite the pre-existing disturbing elements. Humour coupled with violence and gore, makes HTF no doubt a compelling source of entertainment.


Absurdity

Cartoons itself is absurd, but HTF is even more absurd, with all possible and impossible misfortunes befalling on the characters. Lumpy can actually get moronic to the extent where he did not realise that he cut off the wrong leg, not to mention that he could have used other methods to escape (like using the spoon to dig a hole in the ground) than to mutilate himself. It is, however, such absurdity, things absent in real life, which draws audience to the shows.


Quoting a few YouTube viewers:
"lol thats sick but its soo irresistably funny!" – dd23432
"Its so funny but it looked so painful! I Laughed softly with a sad and painful Tear in my eye!Its funny but it hurts! " – bloodybird2k6
"This makes me SICK!I hate it, but I love it too HTF 4EVA! " – MeaganWood

"these are all bloody cartoons they are not even happy tree friends they are more like bloody tree friends! cause every single episode has blood! Why did mondo even make this?" – princessperky276

The last comment received a rating of -4, so does that actually mean that people are charmed by HTF, that they no longer see anything wrong in the violence and bloodshed, and are even cheering for it?




*Picture captured from video "Happy Tree Friends - Out On a Limb" by MondoMedia on http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RO7Q1tMGE7g

Labels: cultural anxieties, Out on a Limb, personal opinion, SinYee

Can you love it?
They're cute-looking little critters, and they come in the kinds of pretty colors that would be right at home in kiddie cartoons or on children's birthday greeting cards. They have names such as Cuddles (a bright yellow rabbit), Giggles (pink pussy cat with bow), Petunia (blue skunk with orange flower) and Lumpy (who looks like Bullwinkle's loopy cousin). They chirp away, sounding a bit like demented chipmunks, and they appear in an array of short adventures that end with wholesome helpful advice slogans such as "Don't forget to floss!", "Eat your vegies!" and "Take your vitamins!"

But appearances are deceptive…

Take “Havin' a Ball”, in which Pop (father) & Cub's (son) game of catch takes an unexpected turn when Pop is run over and falls off a cliff. His descent is interrupted by the rotor-blades of a helicopter (carrying Lumpy), and he lands in a vermillion splat. Cub tries to retrieve the ball, but he's squashed flat by Lumpy, who in turn is squashed flatter still by the stricken helicopter. There are no survivors…

Happy Tree Friends – Havin' a Ball



The experience of watching "Happy Tree Friends" is an awkward one. Sitting through a few episodes got me thinking, “Why am I even watching this”? It just feels wrong… It’s like watching one horrible accident after another.

"Happy Tree Friends" is really one of those things where viewers either immediately love it or hate it. But it also one of those things you have to see to believe.

After some time, you get really “disgusted” by all that you see and it’s like, you just tell yourself that’s enough gore for a day.

I’m always curious as to who actually likes to watch all these… Even my 15-year-old brother and 19-year sister find the gore disconcerting. Interesting right? To think I thought teenage boys would be so into it. I know I’m bad. Stereotyping…

I find it really fascinating or should I say disturbed when I actually hear people tell me that despite the gore, they tend to continue watching it, because they’ll be curious about what would happen next, what other possible scenario and horrible death sequence could the authors actually come up with…

Hmm… probably that’s one of the main driving forces behind "Happy Tree Friends” that prompts people to watch?

I caught this on the “Happy Tree Friends” website. It really set me thinking so I thought I’d just share:

Comedy served up just the way you like it
short, funny, free… and loaded with unnecessary violence, racial insensitivity, misguided politics and screwed up values.

What is it all telling? You tell me? In fact, I haven’t quite recovered from the gore…

Labels: Faustina, Havin' a Ball, personal opinion

Emily
As lucid, elegant and socially engaged as Lumpy, she's a slow motion accident in progress. .


Faustina
The freckled-faced with buckteeth. She has a really short-term memory. A very forgetful girl… Sorry, where was I again?


Sin Yee
The girl who is always there for help. But erm, the WRONG help, making things worse?


Geck Ying
The Escapist. Self centred and indecisive. Think twice before you seek her for help. It's more trouble than it’s worth.



- Characterisation as Reflective of Stereotyped Personalities
- Can You Love It?
- ‘Out on a Limb’ -- Popularity of HTF
- Read 'Em and Weap
- A Personal Opinion
- Moral Values
- Wait and See. The End is ALWAYS Imminent...
- HTF: A Resistance Movement?
- Life Full of HTF
- A Random Thought
- Round 1: Violence vs. Gore (Part 1)
- HTF and Genres
- Warning -- CARTOON VIOLENCE
- Round 2: Violence vs. Gore
- Cultural Anxieties
- On Cruelty Towards Animals
- We Call It Cartoons...But It's No Longer For Children?
- Crew
- Ipso Fatso
- Is Television Still Ahead of the Race?
- Interview With the Creators



October 2007
November 2007



Happy Tree Friends Official Website
Happy Tree Friends Online Games
MondoMedia on YouTube
HTF on Wikipedia