The Wells article is a picture of the arts through the lens of animation. Wells concisely draws the line between who he sees as “us” and “them”. Wells calls traditional animation “orthodox” as if it’s a religion. From the tone of the piece I feel that he’s an animation atheist and believes that orthodox animation squanders unorthodox pursuits.

It’s interesting to see the ways to subvert conventional animation that Wells lays out. The article is an anarchist cookbook for those that want to experiment. If abstraction, Specific non-continuity, interpretive form, evolution of materiality, multiple styles, presence of artist, and dynamics of musicality were followed, as the article suggests, the product would be the kind of highly personal experimental films that I enjoy.

These techniques can be applied to all art forms when the media is taken into account. The ingredients sound like the trappings of modern art.

I found the article easy to understand and made it clear what many feel an experimental film should be, but I fear having these guidelines might counter intuitively make experimental animation more formulaic.