View Single Post
Old February 24 2013, 03:36 AM   #75
Christopher's Avatar
Re: "The Slaver Weapon"

Therin of Andor wrote: View Post
Were Filmation's colourists even based in USA?
Absolutely yes. In fact, just about every Filmation animated show was produced within a single building, with the writers on one floor, the recording studio on another, the animators on another, ink and paint on another, camera on another, and so forth. It was pretty much a self-contained assembly line, with an episode passing through the building from floor to floor until it was completed. Filmation was the last TV animation studio to produce its shows completely in the US even after everyone else had subcontracted the animation out to Asian companies. The only Filmation production that was ever done overseas was The New Adventures of Zorro in 1981, whose animation was subcontracted to TMS in Japan because Filmation had too many shows on its plate that year and couldn't make them all in-house. (But at least they went with the best.)

As for the kzinti, would they necessarily see pink as a "sissy" colour?
For that matter, Americans in the '70s wouldn't have seen pink that way. I've seen episodes of '70s TV shows like Mission: Impossible and The Rockford Files where big macho men like Charles Napier and James Garner wore bright pink shirts. Apparently it didn't have an "effeminate" stigma at the time.

For that matter, when the custom of color-coded blue and pink baby clothes first came into use in the 1910s-20s, it was pink that was the boys' color:
For example, a June 1918 article from the trade publication Earnshaw's Infants' Department said, “The generally accepted rule is pink for the boys, and blue for the girls. The reason is that pink, being a more decided and stronger color, is more suitable for the boy, while blue, which is more delicate and dainty, is prettier for the girl.” Other sources said blue was flattering for blonds, pink for brunettes; or blue was for blue-eyed babies, pink for brown-eyed babies, according to Paoletti.

In 1927, Time magazine printed a chart showing sex-appropriate colors for girls and boys according to leading U.S. stores. In Boston, Filene’s told parents to dress boys in pink. So did Best & Co. in New York City, Halle’s in Cleveland and Marshall Field in Chicago.

Today’s color dictate wasn’t established until the 1940s, as a result of Americans’ preferences as interpreted by manufacturers and retailers. “It could have gone the other way,” Paoletti says.

Read more:
Follow us: @SmithsonianMag on Twitter
(Well, that's new. The Smithsonian site somehow embedded an automatic link when I copied and pasted the text. I would've linked anyway, but I'm surprised that's technically possible.)
Written Worlds -- Christopher L. Bennett's blog and webpage
Christopher is offline   Reply With Quote