An interesting way to look at how humans understand animals is to look at how we visually represent the word. Here are some of the top results from a google image search for animal and animals.
  | |
 |  |
 |  |
Do you see any ways that the human:animal binary is perpetuated in these images? Why are certain animal species over represented? Which humans are considered animal? Think about the effect of grouping diverse beings and representing them as exotic or dangerous. What else do you see here?
Some initial thoughts:
ReplyDelete-There is a over-representation of the stereotypically "exotic" animals, such as lions, tigers, zebras, elephants, giraffes, gorillas, etc. However a lot of these animals are also major zoo attractions. Are they over represented here and in zoos as well because my deeming them dangerous or exotic we are further distancing ourselves from them? In creating a larger void between humans and these animals we create enough distance that the relatedness or more organic connection cannot be made, and we can completely separate ourselves mentally, emotionally, psychologically. Then we go to zoos and force ourselves to look upon them, caged and bored, and the void is so huge we still make no connection. Sorry that sort of went off topic and into larger philosophical questions about zoos...
-Also I find it interesting that pictures of insects, amphibians, etc. would come up as a hit because those are species we typically don't consider "animals". I guess this would demonstrate that the generic definition of an animal does not even encompass all living, feeling, vertebrates.
-Finally, it's interesting that you included the animal caricature picture because it adds more human, relatable characteristics to the animals. They are standing upright, some are smiling, their eyes are expressing some sort of goofy, endearing expression. Perhaps the only way to validate an animal, to connect it with being even remotely relatable to a human animal, is to project human personalities or characteristics onto them. But that opens up an entire other can of worms.
I think you make a great point here - the "exotic" animal is over represented because there is a greater perceived separation between humans and "exotic beasts". Notice how there aren't any monkeys in any of the animal collages. So, why is this? What even makes an exotic animal exotic? Think about geography, colonialism and racist language (zoos also feed into this)
ReplyDeleteAlong this vein, why are so many different species of animals so absurdly clustered together within a single image? What kind of stories does this tell us about animals and nature?
As for the animal caricature pictures - is this a way for humans to connect with other animals, or a way for us to reduce them to objects that we can use to talk about ourselves? I think it has to be both...
Thanks for the thoughtful comment Blayne!
pictures showing odd combos of species tell the story
ReplyDeleteEdward Hicks painted over and over
"Peaceable Kingdom"
Isaiah 11
"the leopard will lie down with the goat"
That's a fascinating story, Maureen. Apparently, Hicks painted over 60 versions of the same scene in the early nineteenth century. Inspired by his Quaker faith, he used animals from the Bible, which symbolized different human traits or values, to promote a vision of peace and love - between humans, of course.
ReplyDeleteI think it's interesting how the Bible uses animals to think about human behavior, although the book also teaches humans that animals are subservient. It's consistent, really - we can use other animals as symbols and as objects/natural resources. I think animal symbolism usually reinforces the objectification, because it reduces living beings in all their complexity and moral ambiguity to projections of human character. In both cases, the animal is valued only for how it can be used to achieve human ends, rather than for it's own intrinsic worth as a living creature.
Really interesting stuff, thanks Maureen!
The animal symbolism in "The Old Mother West Wind Stories" of Thornton Burgess helped me make sense of the world and human interactions. The animal characters helped me sort out the 'complexity and moral ambiguity' of my seven year old mind.
ReplyDeleteToday there are a couple of ants running about my bedroom, I am killing them without regard to their intrinsic worth as living creatures who have been around maybe 80 million years. However I do admire their social behavior.
I also think it's interesting that most of the animals depicted in these photo are the also the most likely to be the target/beneficiaries of conservation efforts. When I took a wildlife conservation course they were called "large charasmatic megafauna" and were depicted as being a great resource for conservationists because people innately liked them and thus they could be used as a cause to preserve larger ecosystems. In fact this is how most conservation works in the U.S. through the Endangered Species Act.
ReplyDeleteThe religious overtones in the first few are especially interesting. In these images all the animals seem to be getting along, but the religious idea of dominion has also played an important role justifying human domination of animals historically...
Most of the animals pictured will be extinct in 30 years. With the extinction of most forms of megafauna, I wonder how people will view animals in the future. With nostalgia? Curiosity? Regret? Anger (at their (human) ancestors)? I am reminded of the scene in Neuromancer in which one of the characters is excited to see a taxidermied horse, saying he has "only seen them in the movies".
ReplyDeleteSeems to me that the animals we are most intrigued by tend to either fall into this group ("charismatic megafauna") or the group seen in the picture on the bottom right. These are what I would call the "alien" lifeforms of Earth. Insects, strange deep sea creatures, "otherworldly" reptiles, etc. It is interesting that many people report seeing "aliens" which resemble praying mantises, jellyfish, octopus, or arachnids when hallucinating on tryptamine drugs, or when having near-death experiences/alien-abduction experiences. I wonder if it is because these animals are on such an extreme end of the animal:human binary that they truly become alien beings to us.
I find it interesting that the only two humans that cropped up in the search are alien, exotic, and eyecatching-beastly steroid man and skeletal androgynous celebrity...do we only pay attention to the bizarre and ghastly in our culture? Our fascination with the fascinating extends to the animal world. Like Blake said conservation efforts might only work if we focus on "charismatic megafauna", what makes them charismatic? lions that can rip us apart, freaky-looking blood-squirting lizards, strangely human-like animals.
ReplyDeleteThis fascination with the exotic reminds me quite a bit of the freak shows that used to be quite popular before they were deemed unethical. People love to stare at elephant man (animal?) and cylopia babies (mythical cyclops beast?). Now we make animals of the people we are obsessed with, like reality shows of jersey shore creatures who go with their primal sex urges and alien obese people who eat 50,000 calories a day and alien nicole ritchies who eat only chicken broth and vodka.