In the recent tutorial I attended on the video screening and discussion of “Eternal Enemies: Lions and Hyaenas” (a National Geographic video by Dereck and Beverley Joubert, 1998); there was a discussion which followed which centered on Anthropomorphisms inherent in the narrative of the “documentary”. Anthropomorphism is defined as “the attribution of human characteristics to non-human animals, most commonly by supposing non-human behavior to be motivated by human emotion that might motivate superficially similar human behavior”
Well, it so happens that I was reminded of a youtube video I had watched some time back about a
LION lunging forward (not attacking though, but) this time to hug its rescuer. This occurred in CALI, Colombia: Where, “through the bars of his cage, a 110-kilogram (240-pound) African lion named Jupiter stretches his giant paws around the neck of Ana Julia Torres — and plants a kiss on her puckered lips.” (International Herald Tribune, published Jan 5th 2007). The International Herald Tribune even went on to claim that “It could be a kiss of gratitude: Since Jupiter was rescued six years ago from a life of abuse and malnutrition in a traveling circus, Torres has fed and nursed him back to health at her Villa Lorena shelter for injured and mistreated animals.”
Using that Youtube footage as my case study. This entry will center generally around 2 main threads.
1.)The
ACT of the lion hugging the woman and some of it’s implications. And…
2.) (What I feel is) The
PERFORMATIVITY of the act of the lion hugging the woman and the implications behind it.
As a critical viewer of this footage, it occurred to me that it was mentioned that the Lion was rescued from a
circus. This point was merely made in passing and not stressed upon. But allow me to direct all our attention to this very circumstance. Circus= trained animals (which perform tricks and stunts for human entertainment) = continuous
conditioning. A lion has no need to stand on its hind legs the same way Jupiter did, in the wild, unless it is leaping forward to pounce on a prey. The fact that Jupiter responded the way he did to Ana when she tapped on the bars of his cage, is telling of his past conditioning. Jupiter was pacing about in front of her, but did not “hug” her on his own initiative, rather, only after she motioned to him.
It would be safe to assume that Jupiter the lion associated Humans (the
bridging stimuli) as the giver of rewards (in the case of the circus), the abuser (the circus trainers) and then once again, the giver of rewards (his life and health as a “reward” from Ana). Not to mention that humans WERE its only
secondary reinforcement considering animals in circuses are kept separate and all forms of interaction were limited to the animal and human (trainers and audience). Under the intense and confined circumstances of the circus, reward and abuse rode side by side with no middle ground. Hence, if one was not the abuser, he was the giver of rewards, and vice versa. Simple as that to poor Jupiter. Since Ana wasn’t abusing it nor depriving it of rewards, SHE became its ultimate stimuli to reward.
As such, I feel that the news stations had quite misconstrued what was supposed to be Operant conditioning as an Anthropomorphic display on the part of the Lion.
Since we are on the topic of
Learning, There was this other video on youtube similar to this one.
It is about a Lion (Christian) who was bought from the Harrods Department store in 1969 (trust me, I had the SAME LOOK OF DISBELIEF when I was doing research for this video. I mean… HARRODS?!) And it grew too big for its owner (John Rendall) to handle and had to be Rehabilitated and released in the wild in Kenya. But 9 months later when the owner visited it again, Christian flung itself at the owner to hug it as it used to in London. A very apparent sign of
Imprinting. “A form of learning in which individuals exposed to certain key stimuli usually during an early stage of behavioral development, form an association with the object, and may later display a behavior towards similar objects.” (animal behavior text book) It’s interesting stuff. Having to see it play out instead of learning it from text.
On to my second thread on the
performativity of the act of the lion hugging the woman, and the implications behind it. Firstly, it was taken to several news stations (check out youtube. It’s on BBC, TVP(Bruxelles), and a myriad of US news stations I’m too disgusted to name.) The idea behind the video is simple. It’s a rare sighting, a touching moment, and more importantly, a spectacle. The combination of these three things having the utmost potential to increase viewership and channel ratings.
The footage is reductionist as it performs a mere function in its representational ability which tinkers with the viewer’s sentimentalism and at the risk of misinformation. This would probably be my cryptic and cynical take on this video, similar that of a short blurb by Cliff Hamilton entitled “ANTHROPOMORPHISM. You Should Know What It is.” In his article, he claims (and I cannot help but agree more) that the “anthropomorphic treatment of animals makes much more appealing cartoon material and printed stories. It certainly sells more copies, too, but there are their prices that society pays for such seemingly harmless portrayals. As the urbanization of this country continues, huge portions of our population have increasingly less contact with wild life and the natural world. To many people, these cuddly bears, crafty foxes and wise old owls are more real than the animal itself. Anthropomorphic approaches to wildlife constitute little more than false advertising”
I mean look at it this way. It’s HURTING conservation efforts more so than aiding it. How many times have you went to a cinema to watch a *cough* Disney *cough* flick, and some brat comes prancing out, yelling “MOMMY MOMMY!!! I WANT A PET LION!!!!”
SO you see, there draw a fine line between fictionalizing in the context of cartoons (believe me, I love me cartoons.) and exploiting a video footage for the sake of viewership ratings. But the fact of the matter is that such displays of anthropomorphisms are broad casted on news stations
encodes it with new meaning, it legitimatizes the animal’s (or in this case, a lion’s) actions as one which has human like qualities as a kind of a truth (scientific or not) when in fact it is still very much in the process of research.
Moral of the story? Love animals. But love them under an educated mindset. Oh yes. And don’t trust the “liberal” Media.
References
a. Allaby, M (ed.), 1992. “The concise Oxford Dictionary of Zoology.” Oxford University Press, 508pp.
b. Colombian teacher nurses abused lions, other wild animals back to health. The Associate Press. The International Herald Tribune. 5th January 2007. http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/01/05/america/LA-GEN-Colombia-Animal-Shelter.php
c. Lecture 4/5
d. Hamilton, Cliff. Anthropomorphism: You Should Know What It Is. Rangelands, Vol. 5, No. 4. (Aug., 1983), p. 166. Accessed on 17th March 2008. Stable URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=01900528%28198308%295%3A4%3C166%3AAYSKWI%3E2.0.CO%3B2-2