Week 3-
1. All three leaders of the Bronx zoo pushed for a change in the way
that zoos were presented on an educational level. The lack of scientific fields
and knowledge expressed prior, made it difficult for the audience to fully
invest in connections with the natural habitat and information of different
species. There was a push for acknowledging conservation and natural resources.
In this way, the animals were becoming the focal point, rather than the
customers who admired them. Zoos were beginning to become more of a center for
awareness than just a place for entertainment. Osborn created a more open
atmosphere and was open to new ideas to changing the zoo. Such new implements
were to take out the ban of cameras, and implement a train that took customers
directly there. However, conservation was still at the forefront of his
concerns. In addition to the conservation of animals, he created “ConFound”
which was a foundation to preserve natural conditions of animals alongside biological
studies, because of the important correlation between natural resources and sustainability
of wildlife. As far as design, Osborn emphasized an exhibit development, such
as the ape house.
The African
Plains exhibit was one of the most drastic changes made in the zoo. It merged
vegetation to mimic exotic species. Although this was innovative, it also was a
bit naïve, in that there was an inauthentic feel- it was just copying the
plant, fooling the audience. Asides from this imitation, human visitors were
placed outside the scene, looking at the “set”, where the animals were. Thus,
there was quite a divide between human and animal.
I believe
that Hancocks praises the Bronx zoo, because it really did seem to transcend
from what the norm was at the time; by establishing more educational exhibits,
visitors became more aware, whereas in years past, zoos were foremost a place
of entertainment, and to some degree, a leisurely hobby.
2a- Seattle’s Woodland Park Zoo established a
reorganization of the layout found in traditional zoos. Rather than looking at
the exhibits in a taxonomic and geographic manner, it created a new system of
arrangement according to its bioclimatic zones. Jones and Jones were the
designers behind this plan, and through lots of research, were able to
integrate the Holdridge system into the layout of the zoos. This system
responded directly to natural microhabitats of the site and reflected
specialized habitats where plants and animals had adapted over time. Although
innovative, the problem was that wild animals are not placed in or restricted
to one particular geographic area. When one factors climatic geography into the
mix, it can create even more distortion. Perhaps they felt that their plan was
superior because they ensured that the zoo worked with its own natural environment
and vegetation. They did not disregard the importance of vegetation, putting as
much effort into the plants as to the animals. As a way to create this system
of new order, they displayed exhibits that lacked the presence of an animal,
defending their claim that “transition of one bioclimatic zone to the other
required a certain amount of transition, even though there were no appropriate
animals”. Thus, such exhibits showed the transition without the animal, such as
the Caribou. To further include humans into the experience, they created
landscape immersion that simulated habitats to create a “perfect illusion” so
that the viewer would not sense a separation between animals and the
naturalistic habitat created. By doing so, vegetation and rock formation was
always authentic, and animal needs were thought of first.
2b- The Arizona-Sonora Desert Museum did not
include the pronghorn deer for various reasons, including being a hazard to the
animals’ health. By using the concept of landscape immersion, they were able to
mimic the habitat without the costs. Against some of the preferences of
trustees to include the deer, the zoo went forward with its plan to create an
alternative exhibit. While size plays a big role in the touch of admiration
from the spectator, this does not necessarily mean that the bigger the animal,
the more importance it is to the wild. This is why the museum decided to focus
on a smaller, more unknown animal to represent the desert grassland habitat, as
well as the vegetation itself. I believe this approach benefitted both the zoo
financially, and the animal, in regards to limitation in space. I think there
are alternatives and a plethora of animals to choose from, so by not choosing
the most obvious or popular choice, is a great way to expand knowledge on
wildlife from different regions of the world.
3. I found Wilson’s
argument to be rather intriguing and complex, by generalizing the psyche of
human instinctions. Habitat selection inordinately tells how a certain species
must adapt to survive. It is extremely precise. The difference between man and animal
is that we have the ability to adapt to any environment, and make it more “livable”,
whereas animals are created to live in specific regions and habitats throughout
the world. Once away from this natural setting, it is possible to survive,
however, their instincts are askew. One example is the process the gorillas
underwent to reestablishing the natural instinct of having contact with grass,
something never known to them before the landscape immersion exhibition in the
Seattle zoo. I do believe Wilson is
correct by stating, “When people are away to spaces of “featureless land” they
try as hard as they can to replicate a natural terrain”. By creating this feel
of nature, demonstrates the inclination humans do have towards falling towards
nature, even amongst the best technology. I found it particularly insightful
with the discussion of preference to specific environments, and the psychology
behind this, however, I do think a factor to our preferences can come from what
has been told and of passed down to us. The habitats we are accustomed to, or
what may have been comfortable to our ancestors, do transgress to ourselves as
well. However, we do have a choice of following these traits, or assimilating
to other environments that are foreign to our past.
No comments:
Post a Comment