Author: Michael Galperin

I just read this interesting article on NPR about how dogs do pay attention to the meaning of words.

“…the findings show something surprising: “That dogs are able to differentiate between meaningful and meaningless sound sequences.”

http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2014/11/28/367092004/how-dogs-understand-what-we-say

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:

Not too long ago in class we talked about the Spanish Nurse that was infected with Ebola, and consequently the authorities euthanize her dog.

Well, I saw on the news recently the the Dallas Nurse that was infected with Ebola also has a dog. Luckily, authorities will not euthanize the dog. More  about this story is found here.

When you first think of a cow, the first word that pops in your head is probably not skinny. In 1994, Nestle added the Skinny Cow brand to their vast food empire. On each product of the Skinny Cow line, the customer views the iconic “skinny cow.” This slender cow, that is actually named Skinny, is meant to show consumers that “great-tasting snacks” do not have to mean you have to eat unhealthily, according to Skinny cow’s website. This particular product that is photographed is their “Divine Filled Chocolates Candy.”

On this package, Skinny is lying on top of a banner of the product name in a quite comfortable and flirtatious manner. She has a tape measurer around her to demonstrate all of the weight she has lost thanks to these delicious snacks. Nestle even took a next step and gave Skinny some mascara, red lipstick, contacts for bright hazel eyes, and a curvy figure. Nestle has anthropomorphized this cow with woman-like features and even a name to relate her to the most-likely woman consumer.

Prior to reading Jonathan Safran Foer’s novel, Eating Animals, I did not really give much thought to the depictions of animals on products. After reading Foer, I looked a little bit deeper and more carefully at the word choices and the entire image of the cow Nestle specifically picked out on the packaging.

Just look at the word “Skinny” in Skinny Cow. Nestle specifically did not choose the word healthy or low-calorie. They chose the word “skinny” for a reason. They wanted customers to give their product a second look as they passed it in the candy and snack aisle.  Skinny replaces the over-killed words healthy and low-calorie, representing the aspirations of the modern day woman. Perhaps Nestle also chose to use the word “skinny” because, as Foer points out with the terms healthy, fresh, natural, etc., it allows the company to use words that are associated with positive results to the consumer and positive conditions to the animals, all while actually being not necessarily true. Foer, for instance, demonstrates these misleading labels with the word “fresh.” According to the United States Department of Agriculture, “fresh” poultry refers to poultry that has “never had an internal temperature below 26 degrees or above 40 degrees Fahrenheit” (Foer 61). This example showcases how easy it is for a consumer to assume that their “fresh” poultry refers to something completely different to what it actually is. This does not only stop with “fresh.” This also applies to copious amounts of words including “natural,” and even “skinny”- which most likely has nothing written about in USDA regulations.

If you visit the Skinny Cow website, you will encounter the following text, “Meet Skinny, a.k.a. the goddess of all things delicious and indulgent. She laughs often, lives life to the fullest, and never denies herself a Skinny snack.” After my own general knowledge and reading Eating Animals, I cannot help but have to reread those two sentences a few times. The irony involved is quite apparent. In the United States, where now “Ninety-nine percent of all land animals eaten or used to produce milk and eggs… are factory farmed” (34), I found it hard to believe that these cows that make the milk needed for the Skinny Cow brand have any life that is lived to the “fullest” and consists of laughter.

John Berger points out in About Looking that the Industrial Revolution and capitalism have lead to the reduction of the animal in the food industry: “animals required for food are processed like manufactured commodities” (Berger 13).

Sources:

Berger, John. “Why Look at Animals?” About Looking. New York: Pantheon, 1980. 3-28. Print.

Foer, Jonathan Safran. Eating Animals. New York: Little, Brown, 2009. Print.

Since reading Berger’s and Walker’s passages in class, I cannot say that I have  a radically new and enlightened view on how animals are depicted. However, I can say that those passages help me view these depictions in a slightly new way by shedding new light. Viewing the way farm animals are treated has always been an issue important to me. Nowadays, producers and distributors of meat products have tried there best to unanthropomorphism the connections between animals and humans. They focus on engraving only the instrumental value of animals in the minds of the consumer, as opposed to the intrinsic values.

Seeing images like the one posted above, is not the most common image of a pig that most see. This picture depicts what looks like a very intelligent pig. The pig is in a position similar to what the “quintessential librarian” looks like- glasses and posture together. The pig looks soft and clean. It even looks like the pig has a grin.

Most would say that this image is what pops in ones head when one thinks of pigs. Now it isn’t a bad thing to associate pigs playing in mud, since it is natural for them. However, by reinforcing this image in ones head, one subconsciously propagates the stereotypes and prejudices society has instilled with pigs- which is that they are dumb, dirty, fat, and nasty.

 Reading Berger has shown me the deviations, as a society, we have taken in our previously dualistic mindset. We used to treat animals with respect and value, respecting their intrinsic value and instrumental value at the same time (1). Today, we don’t even go that far in respecting them. Alice Walker makes a point in Am I Blue? where she opens conversation about the way we treat animals is similar to the way we treat minorities- for instance, the way white people treated black people during slavery in the United States. If one witnesses how a factory farm operates, one would be appalled in the treatments of the animals. You could equate the way the pigs and other animals are being treated to conditions slaves endured.

Most are not aware of the intelligence that pigs have. Hence why, the producers of the first image created the picture. They made the pig appear intelligent. They are tying to start a conversation to break down the common misconceptions society holds on the intellect of farm animals. Some scientists believe even that pigs are smarter than dogs, smarter than dolphins, smarter than 3-year-olds (2). So if in society we really choose the food we eat by its intelligence- we will not eat monkeys, dogs, cats, etc. due to their intellect but we will eat a cow, pig, and chicken because of their inferior intelligence-, I believe we will see many contradictions arising from scientific data on the actual intelligence of farm animals.

Now, I am not advocating that we all become vegetarians and completely cut out meat from our diets; however, I believe this quote  sums up my thoughts quite well:

“If we’ve decided to eat pigs despite the fact that they are smart, should we not at least use the information that we have to make their lives as positive as possible up until the point when we decide, “Well now they’ve become food?”

Sources:

(1) Berger, John. “Why Look At Animals?” About Looking. New York: Pantheon, 1980. 7. Print.

(2) “Pigheaded: How Smart Are Swine?” Modern Farmer. N.p., n.d. Web. 13 Sept. 2014.

(3) Walker, Alice. “Am I Blue?” Other Nations: Animals in Modern Literature. Ed. Tom Regan and Andrew Linzey. Waco, TX: Baylor UP, 2010. N. pag. Print.

Born to a Russian household,  I was raised in the suburbs of Philadelphia. Originally, I was born in Stamford, Connecticut; however, when I was about one year old my family moved to Philadelphia. I am the youngest of four children and happen to be the only boy, too. In addition, I have an Australian cattle dog named Winnie.

I am majoring in biology with a minor in French. Although my future plans are constantly changing, I currently plan on pursing medical school after Lafayette College and then working for organizations such as Doctors without Borders or Partners in Health.
Even though I have future medical aspirations, I love to read and write. I have not always been this way, though. It was not until high school,where my AP Language and Literature teacher really taught me to love and appreciate reading and writing.

Apart of learning, some of my other passions include cooking, playing tennis, and traveling. I have been cooking since I was about three years old. It is a hobby that allows me travel all across the world without leaving the kitchen. Particularly, I love to cook Indian, Thai, and French dishes. I have been playing tennis for over ten years now and is something that I can never get bored of playing or watching.

As of now, I have only traveled to two other countries, South Korea and Israel. I am planning, however, to extend that amount of countries by studying abroad next semester in Paris, France. There, I will be able to test my French skills I have acquired thus far!