Me and my animation dissertation

If you are interested in environmentalism you could consider how the representation of the environment (natural world) in animations has altered over the course of animation history - the earliest example (off the top of my head) where some form of environmentalism is considered is probably Bambi, where the environment changes in colour mood to reflect the different themes of the film (life vs death), then you could look at how environmentalism is represented by animators such as Frederic Back (The Man Who Planted Trees) where the animation is about one man's struggle to change the environment (whereas Bambi is a weak criticism of those who damage / kill our environment, Frederick Back goes much further). Daiki Aizawa represents the endless cycle of the environment until man enters to disturb and destroy the rhythm in his animation Loop Pool - this film is straight criticism, whereas Frederick Back offers a dialogue that considers options. Mark Baker's Hill Farm might be worth a look for seeing how domesticated and wild nature is represented, and how man responds to both. Rich Scurry's commercial for RBC Blue Water shows visuals that skirt around the issue - you could criticise the animator for failure to deal with the issue for directly.

You could also look into why animation as a medium is used to represent ugly truths - because it is one step removed from film, it can assist in the viewing of potentially troubling material to an audience - they are less likely to turn away because the visuals they see are not real, and therefore less threatening than film, and so that same audience may listen to the message without the prejudice of the visuals.

Good luck!

You need to look into the psychology of representation I think. Either that or look at how symbols are used to represent things that disturb us so that they can be considered as safe to consume - for example how we represent death with symbols. Animation is considered by most adults to be a safe art form; an extension of their childhood, so they do not view it as being something to be concerned by, and therefore they will watch an animation about something disturbing more readily than they would watch a live action film about the same area. It's about how reality is abstracted in animation (well the non photorealistic bits anyway), the less realistic something is, the less of a threat it is. Think about how sex education is taught in schools - do they show films / images of actual people having sex, or do they show drawings / animations? One is considered shocking and morally dangerous, the other is acceptable under the guise of education, but both cover the same message.