Month: November 2014 (Page 2 of 3)

 We as humans have spread our influence to just about every corner of the world, regardless of the implications. The Kruger National Park in Africa is 19,633 square miles, containing 350 black and roughly 8,500 white rhinoceros. Armoured skin, a fierce horn and weighing as much as a car, a rhino is an animal you may never see in the wild unless you seek it out. The sheer size of a rhino along with it’s signature horn make it almost prehistoric, and as a result, not fully understood. The video is short in length, totalling only forty seconds. Within that short time frame we see an intruder and the resulting reaction of the rhino trying to protect itself. The car halts as a rhino appears, as it slowly moves towards the vehicle. It’s worth noting that at around :13 seconds, the rhino makes a charging gesture, as a warning of it’s intentions.

The man in the car that recorded the video seems to be both unaware, and poorly educated about rhino behavior, and attempts to calm the animal by saying “Easy! No! Easy now easy!” This attempt to get through to the animal is futile and representative of a misconception, our domesticated approach and attitude towards animals isn’t universally applicable. In more common terms, how we treat our dog and cat shouldn’t be projected upon a wild rhino. It’s a poorly understood natural world outside of our cushy lives, but it still abides to laws of nature and it’s rules. Nature preserves are examples of what I consider to be glorified zoos, due to the both the sparse human interaction, along with our evident presence. A rhino charging your car will not be stopped by a simple request, but is based on the idea of domestication and it’s consequences. The interaction in this video is short and poorly represents a false ideology of our relationship with the natural world, especially when uneducated. An unrelated but relevant point is even the format of the video attempts to label the animal as dangerous, when in reality it was responding to a threat in it’s own domain. The word CHARGES in the title is capitalized in an attempt to label the rhino as dangerous.

“The spectator’s position is circumscribed by paradox: the zoo promises it will allow them to see everything, but they really are seeing nothing.” This quote from Zoo Spectatorship demonstrates the paradox with our influence in our natural world. The idea of a zoo denies animals their defining qualities, such as a cheetah’s speed to hunt the impala, or the rhino’s horn to protect it’s family and charge through predators. We often become spectators for human enforced entertainment, following Malamud’s idea of voyeurism. Humans as spectators enforce the idea that humans are superior, along with enforcing low interaction animal relationships. Voyeurism is defined by Malamud best through the following quote, “The voyeur seeks a spectacle, the revelation of the object of his interest, that something or someone should be open to his inspection and contemplation; but no reciprocal revelation or openness is conceded” (Malamud 230). Another paradox is as follows: how do we, in a continually intertwined world, influence and remain present in nature in a mutually beneficial manner. Are we supposed to totally remove ourselves and let natural selection persist, or rather control the entire entity that is nature? Nature preserves are examples of conservative approaches towards our relationships with animals. They are human influenced, but nature focused, limiting out interaction. The focus of these preserves are to protect the biodiversity, and are non for profit. The nature focus and no profit definitely are better than a zoo, but still raise moral issues.

Many of these thoughts draw from a similar starting question, are we able to have genuine, and mutually recognized interactions with wild animals, and if so, why? Malamud raises the issue of animals and their media portrayals, which aid in developing a poor identity for wild animals. He argues that media often uses animals due to their inherent relatability, and our perceived mutual interaction. Drawing off a previous point, the title of this video is capitalized and formatted in such a way to draw our attention, but it demonstrates a stupid human overstepping his boundaries. The truth is, the rhino clearly was both defending itself from a foreign object, along with protecting it’s home regardless of the title of the video. This video raises a final issue at the end with the slogan, SHOOT, SHARE, SELL. This simple alliteration forces the animal into being a commodity, a forced instrumental view, which neglects looking at the rhino through an intrinsic lens.

Works Cited:

Malamud, Randy. Zoo Spectatorship. New York: New York University Press, 1998. Print.

I found this video while searching the web today. I think it applies directly with Randy Malamud’s Zoo Spectatorship. As Malamud prefers television networks with animals than the zoos, what would he say about the intentions of the Discovery Channel? I think he would be against this.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QaihEthj4qs

While searching on YouTube for wild animals, I came across this video of a human interacting with a wild Killer Whale. To be honest I did specifically type “killer whales in the wild” into the search bar, but it still counts. I couldn’t resist considering my love for the Orca species. The video, coming from YouTube, isn’t in the best quality. A simple phone camera can record videos and they are being posted on the web. In an instance where an average human being encounters and interacts with a Killer Whale, a simplistic recording device will suffice. In this video we see a human and a whale having a friendly match of tug of war with what seems to be some sort of branch or stick. Both the human and Killer Whale seem to be having a fun time as they experiment with each other, and testing their boundaries. They Killer Whale seem to be equally interested with the human, as the human is interested with the whale. We know that this is a friendly encounter between the human and Killer Whale because the proximity of the human’s hand to the Killer Whales mouth was close enough for the killer to bite off. Instead, the ginormous creature with a reputation of being ferocious (hence receiving the name “Killer Whale”) decides to gently grab hold of the stick and interact in a friendly manner. If you listen to human and killer whale are also imitating each other in the noises they make. As the human whistles at the whale, the killer whale projects his whistle, and the two try and match each other in pitch. Since this video was taken from what could be assumed average fisherman, the videography was the least of their concerns. Videoing the interaction by any means was good enough for proof of this amazing incident that had taken place. No music was added and no particular framing of the video. I will say that the person taking the video did a good job of capturing the happy look on the man’s face, as well as the playfulness of the killer whale as they interacted. There was no main point the videographer was trying to portray in this video. No changed were made by editing to makes us believe certain things. The things we see and take from this video are the true consequence of an interaction between human and an animal in the wild.

As I watched and analyzed this video I realized a couple of things. Out there in the wild, the Killer Whale and human were equals. Although humans have the capabilities to hunt and capture whales, this incident shows the true innocent and curious interaction of two species in the wild. Both the human and Killer Whale happened to find each other in the wild and we’re curious to what would happen when approaching each other. While realizing that the interactions are clearly consensual it made me relate to Randy Malamud’s essay Zoo Spectatorship. Randy Malamud commonly comments on the atrocities behind humans spectating animals in zoos, but I find it ironical that we see the animal spectating back. The Killer Whale has taken itself out of its natural course in a day to interact and view this human. We know the Killer Whale isn’t just playing, but spectating because of the Killer Whales actions. The popping up of the head, then lowering back down to view the human is a technique, used by all Killer Whales, known as “spy hopping”. I find it interesting that while Randy Malamud’s essay notes the unreciprocated look from animals, we find an instance where the look is reciprocated, and perhaps even initiated.

Suda the Painting Elephant in a Thailand Zoo

“Painting Elephant in Thailand”

This is a short montage of an elephant show in a zoo in Thailand. The first part of the video is of elephants lined up and “jamming out” to music while playing harmonicas. The music is up beat and cheery as the audience awww and cheers on the elephants. They are nodding their heads up and down and the men in the background are standing around the elephants with cattle prods or sticks of some kind, clearly this implies that this is not a natural behavior, the elephants have been trained to “enjoy” this music.

The next part of the video is a zoom in of another part of the elephant show. The music becomes very relaxing and there is a close-up of an elephant painting. The elephant, Suda, is holding the brush in her trunk. There are many videos of elephants painting on youtube and while trainers claim it is a way for the elephants to practice and demonstrate the adeptness of their trunks, generally this is also not a natural behavior.

The elephant also paints a picture of an elephant reaching for tree leaves and while this is meant to show self-awareness, it is important to the viewer to remember that this is a learned trick. It has been taught to the elephants by their trainers as an effort to entertain the crowd and gain publicity for their business. However, if one wanted to view this in a less cynical manner an argument could be made that the elephant is merely demonstrating it’s intelligence and ability to use it’s trunk. It can be viewed as a way of educating the public about the intelligence of the animal. The camera then pans over to the crowd who applauds Suda and gets up to take pictures on the other side of a railing, clearly the audience is showing 

Suda is even taught to write her own name again demonstrating self awareness. But is she actually aware that this is her name and this is what she looks like? Is she expressing herself through painting? Or is she merely doing a trick taught to her to amuse the public?

Finally, there is a clip of an elephant, presumably Suda, “playing with a soccer ball.” In this clip you see the trainers fully and that they are standing with Suda as she kicks the soccer ball very far. Then as the crowd applauds, presumably Suda is given another command and she throws the ball behind her and kicks it with her back foot. Again an argument can be made that this could be an excursive for Suda, so she keeps up her agility and this is just a playful trick that she enjoys doing. However these tricks that she has been taught do demonstrate her intelligence they are not natural behaviors that an elephant would do and clearly she has been trained them through a technique of “punishment and reward” based on her performance.

Malamud author of Zoo Spectatorship argues that zoo spectatorship, like as what had happened with Suda, is not for the animal but for the humans. He even discusses how zoos express human propensity for imperialism.

Human control over zoo animals celebrates an imperial relation toward the realm of nature and its subordination to our whims. But in the long term, a human society that expresses its relationship to the natural world via the institution of zoos risks foundering amid our imperious ecological ethos (Malamud 228).

What he is saying is that human propensity for control over other beings has led to the popularity of zoos, we enjoy and are entertained by our ability to control other animals. In the case of this video, elephant painting itself, playing music, and kicking a soccer ball, we delight in the fact that we have been able to pass on our knowledge on another animal and are able to control it for our entertainment.  This is a very common practice among zoos, where they claim to be educating the public about the animal when in reality they are teaching animals human behavior which is not natural to the animal. Some may argue that this deepens our relationship with the animal. I have to agree with Malamud however, while I did enjoy watching an elephant paint a self portrait, I also understand that this wasn’t the elephant expressing itself through a creative medium it was a learned behavior that is not natural to the animal and was only preformed after training Suda through a means of punishment and reward. Another way of expressing our control over animals.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uXLbQrK6cXw

Disney’s 2010 film, Oceans, is a nature documentary that explores the marine species found throughout the five oceans on Earth. This particular trailer for the film that I chose to analyze begins with the words narrated by Pierce Bronsan. He tells the audience that this film will take you below the seas, “Disney Nature invites you on a journey through our planet’s five oceans, to discover never before seen worlds through the eyes of the creatures that live there.” It depicts various scenes of the diverse wildlife that embodies the five oceans. It shows baby turtles that arise from the sands of a beach and scrambled their way toward the ocean. It shows animals kissing, playing, and embracing each other. It shows a parent and child animal hugging and holding. It displays species coexisting amongst each other- same species and differing species alike. This tells the audience that most of these organisms depicted are social beings as humans are. These creatures are not isolated from other species or from others in its own genus, as they would be if they were in an aquarium. Many of the scenes showcase organisms that are either staring straight into the camera or looking at another animal. The scene when Bronsan says “through the eyes of the creatures that live there” it shows the scene of seal that rises up from the icy water and kisses its mother.

The music used in this trailer is called “Wonderful” by Gary Go. This is an uplifting song that has the repeating lyrics, “say I am wonderful” and ends with “we are wonderful.” These lyrics help also with the scenes used to create a connection with the audience that humans are not the only social beings on Earth. Humans are not the only organism that can have emotions, thoughts, or communication. Sprinkled throughout the trailer are sound bites of certain marine species making either chirps, howls, or other noises.

Several portions of this trailer correlate to points made by Randy Malamud in “The Zoo Spectatorship.” Malamud does not extend much positive thoughts toward zoos or aquariums. Malamud would likely argue that what this trailer depicts is different than what most videos about animals do. Malamud writes about the repulsive act of viewing animals from a distance in an unnatural environment. In this trailer, the cinematography requires the camera to be up-close- and in the sense an active member in the scenes with the wildlife. There is no distance between the camera and the marine species. The audience views the species in their most natural state and their most natural daily interactions.

Albeit a main reason for making this trailer/film was profits (probably a huge factor), I do believe that there is a large educational component as well. The audience takes away the difference between what viewing animals in a zoo or aquarium and viewing them in their natural environment- something that Malamud would appreciate. Definitely there is an entertainment factor involved for the audience; however it does not disrespect or patronize the animals involved as it would if this film was a documentary about how animals in a zoo or aquarium interact.

An interesting note to take into account is that when I was doing some research into this film, I found out that the original French version of the film is about twenty minutes longer than the North American version. Those twenty minutes depicts violent massacres of sea animals, recreated through visual effects to demonstrate some of the negative aspects of human activity on the environment. Is poses an interesting question in regards to why did Disney choose to omit those scenes from the North American viewers.

Sources:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K3p0EFtJIn8

This video is titled “A Cat’s Guide to Training Your Human” and I found it by searching the word “cat” on Youtube. However, after watching this video, I learned that there is an entire youtube page dedicated to videos of the same two cats called “Cole and Marmalade.” Although most of the clips only include the cats (there are only two total in the video), a few of the clips also show a male human. The cats appear to be very willing to approach the human, so it likely that the human in the video owns the cats.

The video is a series of clips that is originally introduced as a cat’s explanation of how to get a human to do things in the cat’s favor. However, it seems like the real purpose of the video is to reflect on the “silly” and somewhat humorous things that cats often do. Throughout the video, different captions are displayed on the screen which provide the steps to be used when “training your human”. Following each caption is a corresponding video clip that shows these the scenarios taking place. For example, one caption says “When they clean the litter box, use it immediately afterwards”. This caption is followed by a clip that shows a human emptying a litter box and a cat going into the litter box immediately after. Other captions say “Keep them active. Leave fur.. cat litter… cardboard shreds.. and dead bugs around the home… so the humans feel like they have a purpose.” The clips following these captions show cats making messes and a human cleaning up afterward. Several captions and corresponding video clips similar to these are shown throughout the video. There is also background music in the video that is somewhat silly and is similar to the type of music that is often played in movies when people are trying to be sneaky.

Although this video may have been meant to be humorous and to reach out to other cat owners who can relate to these situations, there are also several parts of this video that correspond with points made by Randy Malamud in The Zoo Spectatorship. In his writing, Malamud writes “One of the pleasures of visiting a zoo is feeding the animals. The act is generous and the pleasure is innocent, although both derive from a base of superiority and power.” This video does not primarily how cats being fed,  it certainly projects similar ideas about superiority and power. Although this video is about cats who think that they hold the power in the household, this “power” is shown in a sarcastic manner that is laughed at by those who view the video. Those who watch this video are reminded that humans are in fact “in charge” of animals whether or not the animal accepts this idea. The sarcasm serves to reinforce the dominance of the human who created this video by pointing out the absurdity of a cat’s imagined power.

Malamud may also argue that this video and other similar videos about animals create a distance between humans and animals.  In Zoo Spectatorship, he discusses the way in which “computers promise ultimate control” because animals on the internet are decontextualized due to their lack of physical presence to the viewers (234). He goes on to discuss the way in which the internet allows humans to view animals without dealing with the negative aspects that would accompany an actual interaction with an animal (ex. “the smell of shit”). This gives humans the ability to pick and choose what aspects of the animal they would like to experience while ignoring other less favorable aspects of the animal. The ability to do this creates a separation between the human and animal because the human’s idea of the animal may become distorted. Although Malamud also discusses positive aspects of computers, these ideas to not always apply in regards to this video. For example, Malamud mentions that computers “distance viewers even further from animals, but compensate with more (and instant) data and knowledge (234). This knowledge may be acquired through educational animal videos, but most Youtube videos including “A Cat’s Guide to Training Your Human” are for pure entertainment and lack any educational information.

Although the creator of this video most likely took the time to create the video because he loves and is amused by his cats, Randy Malamud would most likely have several problems with it. Several aspects of “A Cat’s Guide to Training Your Human” correspond with Malamud’s discussions about human-animal power relationships and the separations between humans and animals. This video and many other videos on Youtube may simply be meant to be humorous. However, these videos may have negative consequences on the relationship between humans and animals.

Malamud, Randy. Zoo Spectatorship. New York: New York University Press, 1998. Print.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cB_2nwNDSrQ

I discovered this video whilst searching “wild lions” on youtube. It immediately caught my eye because it combined two of my favorite things: soccer and lions. The video raises awareness about wild lions and their diminishing habitat, shows the amazing interaction humans and lions can share, and serves as an advertisement for a suit. The video opens with self-proclaimed lion expert Kevin Richardson explaining his personal history with lions which contained vast experience of protecting and bonding with lions. The video opens with Kevin receiving a huge bear hug by a male lion. The video continues with Kevin walking next to the lion in a long view shot that encompasses the landscape. Kevin narrates the problems lions have in today’s world, all the while showing his amazing control with lions. Eventually, a birds eye view of three lions and Kevin with an orange soccer ball appears and the foursome begin footballing. Kevin actually tries a few skills to get past the lion and the two lionesses, while the lions simply chew the ball. The music throughout the clip is very lion king-esque until the football scene where it becomes more uptempo and has an almost electronic connotation to it.

Not only did I find this video amazing, I found it to be completely relevant to Randy Malamud’s essay Zoo Spectatorship. Throughout his essay, Malamud has not a single positive thing to say about zoos. What Kevin does here (while it is not applicable to the other 99.99% of the world) is interact with wild lions. He does not simply look at them from a distance in an unnatural habitat, something that Malamud argues is distasteful and disrespectful to the animals. Kevin gets to experience the lions in their most natural state, and his interactions are able to get captured on video. While some may say it is a negative thing that Kevin is teaching these lions to be friendly towards humans while a large portion of humans approaching lions are poachers, I argue against it. I think his interactions with these lions can prove to humans that lions are kind, magical animals. Kevin also uses his videos to raise awareness about the diminishing habitat of the lions due to pollution and the dwindling population size because of increased poachers.

I appreciate this video because, as Malamud states, people should be “more concerned with what the imprisonment of animals says about the people who create, maintain and patronize zoos,” then the effect of zoos on the animals. (222). Kevin, like Malamud, would not appreciate zoos because they do not teach people the real lesson animals have to offer us. Kevin embodies Malamud’s ideas going against spectatorship. Animals are beautiful creatures and should be treated as such. The way Kevin involves himself with the lions goes against everything Malamud argues about zoos. The lions literally look into Kevin’s eyes, unlike in zoos where the “animals deflate the human gaze we conceive as so puissant, by cutting us in return – refusing to dignify or acknowledge our self-important ritual of looking.” (222). Everything Kevin did in this video proves how important it is to be involved with animals, not just spectate them.

Malamud, Randy. Zoo Spectatorship. New York: New York University Press, 1998. Print.