Response Questions Week 2 - IR

Isabella Rotman’s Response Questions

1- How did Linnaeus’ (taxonomic) method of classifying organisms influence the design and composition of early British zoo such as the London Zoo? How does the notion of “stamp collecting” relate, and in what context is it brought up in the readings about Lincoln Park Zoo (The Ark in the Park)? Why is “stamp collecting” in the context of zoos potnetially problematic?

‘Stamp Collecting” refers to the practice of putting more emphasis on ‘variety’ in zoos than on long term breeding programs and the general health of the animals. Zoo’s wanted to have one of each genus, or all the species of a genus. Animals were displayed like this also, the big cats with the big cats and the bears with the bears. A perfect example of this is the Lion House in the Lincoln Park zoo.

I find this problematic, because it is does not take into account the health of the animals.  The Lincoln Park Zoo was urged to specialize in North American Animals. I wish they had taken that advice. I don’t believe that animals from hot climates, unless they are small animals, which can be housed inside climate controlled enclosures, should be kept in a Chicago Zoo all winter. It is simply not the climate they evolved to inhabit.

This practice also leads to inbreeding. The breeding of animals in zoos can be problematic if attention is not paid to genetics, and in the early days of ‘stamp collection’ zoos, a single female lion, Nellie, could produce over 100 cubs. Over time this inbreeding will result in unhealthy and unhappy animals.

2- While the Little Oracle and The 19th Century Phenomenon readings make it clear that the practice of natural history was very popular in the 1700 and 1800’s, and natural hiistory collections especially so among the wealthy, what other supposed societal value and value to personal development did many believe natural history nurtured and why? Why was the promotion of zoological gardens thought to be an extension of this logic?

It was believed, during the industrial revolution, that industry and science would result in an ‘earthly paradise’ for mankind. The spirit of improvement was strong in the middle class, and they sought enlightenment in the form of education and productivity. For the first time classes were available to the working class. The 19^th Century Phenominon describes it well in this sentence “Recreation was to be used primarily for self advancement.”

As a result of this attitude, coupled with new discoveries of the time, interest in Natural History grew to a ‘mania’. Natural History collections had been popular for a long time, but only now were they somewhat available to the middle class. “Natural History Studies offered a solid basis for emotional, aesthetic, and intellectual satisfaction for middle-class parents and their children. They also served to reveal God’s handiwork, and thus, a path to understanding divine wisdom.”

However, living collections, still remained an upper class luxury. It wasn’t until after the French Revolution, and finally the London Zoo, the zoo’s because readily available to all classes. The London zoo was seen as a place were The middle class could not only wonder at nature, but also observe the Aristocracy and learn from them.  Zoo’s and Botanical gardens were seen as essential to spreading understanding of nature and thus, a new harmonious society based on science and progress.

3- According to the video Animal Showboat to Animal Lifeboat, what was the result of the public demand for seeing exotic animals? In what ways were zoos involved , practically and in principle, to the “showboating” and trade of animals? Consider the history of the Lincoln Park Zoo in this regard. What the practice of “care for life” in zoos?

According to this video the result of the public demand to see animals, specifically cute baby animals, resulted in surplus animals that the zoo’s could not afford to take care of. Many of these individuals were either killed or ended up in less than ideal living situations, such as starring in television shows, performing in the circus, or being someone’s exotic pet. In principle, zoo’s are ‘showing’ animals to educate, but also to entertain. This entertainment factor is often abused, and results in unhappy lives for the animals. I believe there is a thin line here, between what is okay and what is not, and the general social understanding of where that line is has fluctuated a great deal over time.

I believe the Lincoln Park zoo started as ‘showboating’ and perhaps continues in some regards. While some of the animals in the zoo’s are ‘rescues’ and would not survive in the wild, other specimens do exist simply because the public wants to see them, and many of these specimens do not do well in the habitat and recreation zoo’s provide. I see it on a case by case basis. The meerkats look happy. The tiger does not.

4- So: according to John Berger, Why do we look at animals? Now and / or then? Summarize and synthesize his argument (don’t simply quote him, I already read the essay myself!). Discuss two or three ways in which Berger answers the question he poses (pets, anthropomorphism, zoos). He argues there is a “similar, but not identical, abyss of non-comprehension” when animals and humans look at each other. What could me mean by this? Do you agree? If there is anything that strikes you as particularly interesting in his essay, please mention it and say why.

I believe the best way to summarize Berger’s answer to “why we look at animals” is by saying “Because we consider ourselves separate from animals.” Most of Berger’s examples involved what makes us different from other species, and how this difference effects our relationship with said other species.  He states that we are separated from animals by symbolic thought, and furthermore, language. This is why, according to Berger, the interaction of two men is different from man and animal, or animal and animal. The presence of language, even if the language is not shared by both men, changes the interaction. He also points out that the first symbols were animals, and that man constantly uses animals as a point of reference, for metaphor, symbolism, and Anthropomorphism.

Berger discusses this change over time. He states that in the origin of language animals were used as symbols, the subjects of the first images, and considered messengers. They were used for food and practical purposes, but also cultural and religiouse purposes.

Over time, animals became the objects of metaphor. They were used often in literature to exemplify the features of characters. With the industrial revolution, man’s dependence on animals changed. Animals, which had once been machines, were now raw materials.

Berger sees animals holding a different place in modern consumer society then they did before. For example, pet’s serve no practical purpose for their owners. Pets are isolated, limited, removed from their habitat, and are general a part of their owner’s way of life. Because of this the man will anthropomorphize the animal, and the animal may view the man as a member of it’s own species social group, breaking the ‘parallelism’ between the species. Zoo’s are similar in that the animals serve no practical purpose, and are shaped by the lives of man. However Berger believes zoo’s serve as a metaphor for man’s relationship with animals, how we look at them, and they cannot look at us.

I have trouble with this essay. Not only did I find his winding metaphors confusing, but also a bit self-indulgent. I believe man is an animal. We are not special because of our capacity for language or our “Dominion over the earth.” Many species have language. To our knowledge, human beings have the most advanced languge, but we are certainly not the only animals able to communicate. Apes have been taught sign language. Bee’s can tell other bee’s of their hive, through dance, where to find nectar and the suspected quality of the nectar in question. I read once that prairie dogs can, through chirps, communicate something as descriptive as “large black dog walking”.  There are border collies who can, when asked, select a certain colored toy  from a pile of toys. These dogs can distinguish something as advanced as “Select the new toy from the pile.” The examples go on and on. We are not the only species that can communicate, and I don’t think it makes us as special as Berger does.